Open dbs opened 9 years ago
OK - was trying to capture 1.0 as a start point. to nail the proposal to.
Also a place for providing links to the source files for the schemaorg group to pick up from.
Done in hurry at the back of a conference room. Fully intend that future moves would be via branches.
~Richard
On 28 Apr 2015, at 11:54, Dan Scott notifications@github.com<mailto:notifications@github.com> wrote:
Hi, for the sake of retaining commit revision and authorship history, please don't squash the commits down into a single monolithic initial commit as appears to have been done here.
It's much better practice to maintain separate branches and merge them; that makes it possible for upstream to simply issue a "git merge" command and retain the entire revision history from all of the contributing branches.
— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/Dataliberate/bibschemaorg/issues/1.
Yes it would be good to have the larger history merge-able...
Can I just grab the two .rdfa files from https://github.com/Dataliberate/bibschemaorg/tree/master/data/ext/bib for integration testing, and expect that you folks will submit a pull request later in such a way that history is preserved better?
See https://github.com/schemaorg/schemaorg/pull/461 which provides a clean merge of the Comics + core bib extension RDFa and examples on top of the sdo-gozer branch. The revision history keeps the entire sdo-gozer and appropriately credits the authors of the various pieces via git commit history.
Thanks for doing this.
~Richard
On 29 Apr 2015, at 17:57, Dan Scott notifications@github.com<mailto:notifications@github.com> wrote:
See schemaorg/schemaorg#461https://github.com/schemaorg/schemaorg/pull/461 which provides a clean merge of the Comics + core bib extension RDFa and examples on top of the sdo-gozer branch. The revision history keeps the entire sdo-gozer and appropriately credits the authors of the various pieces via git commit history.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/Dataliberate/bibschemaorg/issues/1#issuecomment-97600134.
Hi, for the sake of retaining commit revision and authorship history, please don't squash the commits down into a single monolithic initial commit as appears to have been done here.
It's much better practice to maintain separate branches and merge them; that makes it possible for upstream to simply issue a "git merge" command and retain the entire revision history from all of the contributing branches.