CF Folks,
One of the reasons for moving the CF Conventions and Standard Names to
Github was so that the community could help support CF development.
The github fork/branch/pull-request process allows contributors to
submit changes that can be discussed, modified, discussed some more
and then eventually approved with the click of a button, taking the
burden off of one or two people to make all the changes while leaving
the current approval process intact.
Since we have two different version tracked documents (the CF Standard
Name list and the CF Conventions document), we should have two
different repositories. Then for each repository, instead of multiple
entire documents tracked separately, we should have just evolving
document that can be tagged with release numbers when specific
versions are approved.
This is the way different versions are handled in git, and would allow
us to see proposed and approved changes naturally. John Graybeal set
up an example of what this would look like:
https://github.com/graybealski/cf-conventions-work/commit/bb04b242216fa034be35ef6e61d5664d3eae1c1e
I would also argue that we should version CF with the nearly-standard
community practice of numbering system of major.minor.bugfix. This
would allow errors (like typos) in an approved release (like 1.6.0) to
be bugfixed to (1.6.1), which would mean "no new concepts were
introduced, only bugs were fixed".
What do people think?
Thanks,
Rich
--
Dr. Richard P. Signell (508) 457-2229
USGS, 384 Woods Hole Rd.
Woods Hole, MA 02543-1598
Received on Mon Sep 22 2014 - 09:08:12 BST
