From: Andrey Semashev (andrey.semashev_at_[hidden])
Date: 2022-04-16 22:22:13
On 4/17/22 00:30, Niall Douglas via Boost wrote:
> I also think a github repo which acts as the content for the website
> would be a wise thing to retain. People can raise PRs, they can get
> approved, content appears on the website. I think that a good pattern to
> retain rather than yet another portal for reviewing and checking content.
+1. I very much like that the current website can be cloned, with
history, and updated locally or online, and then the changes can be
merged upstream with PRs. The fact that you're using the usual toolset
for this, nothing more than git and your favorite text editor, is a huge
plus. Using a separate interface for that, or a database, would be a
step in the wrong direction, IMO. Your only database should be git.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk