Quote:
Originally Posted by dwig
In this day of false news and deliberate attacks alter data on sites like Wikipedia I don't want books from sites that let random users alter the books. Sending suggested "fixes" to their editors is fine, but direct access to Git is a red flag for me.
|
To be fair to them, the main route for minor fixes appears to be as posts to their mailing list, while the Git route is via GitHub, which
doesn't imply direct access to the project's Git repo.
That workflow would be to 'fork' it into your own personal Get repo, make the changes there then send the original project's maintainer a 'pull' request, inviting them to review and incorporate the changes they approve into the mainstream project - if someone were to be regularly providing high quality edits, they
might give them direct access, but that's a different ball-game.