Re: git-scm.com website

> Shawn Pearce <spearce@spearce.org> writes:
>
>> On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 9:06 AM, David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> wrote:
>>> Shawn Pearce <spearce@spearce.org> writes:
>>>
>>>> On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 6:57 AM, Michael J Gruber
>>>> <git@drmicha.warpmail.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Since we're talking business: git-scm.com still looks a bit like a
>>>>> ProGit/Github promotion site. I don't have anything against either, and
>>>>> git-scm.com provides a lot of the information that users are looking
>>>>> for, and that are hard to find anywhere else; it's a landing page. It
>>>>> just does not look like a "project home".
>>>>
>>>> Yes, git-scm.com is a place to point people.
>>>
>>> It features "Companies & Projects Using Git" at the bottom.  Not
>>> "supporting" but "using".
>>>
>>> Linux is point 10 on that list.  The first 6 items are Google, facebook,
>>> Microsoft, Twitter, LinkedIn, and Netflix.
>>>
>>> Even for an OpenSource project that does not buy into the Free Software
>>> philosophy, that is a mostly embarrassing list of companies to advertise
>>> for.
>>>
>>> Personally, I consider the recent migration of the Emacs repository to
>>> Git a bigger endorsement but then that's me.
>>>
>>> It might make sense to reduce this list just to "Projects" since those
>>> are actually more tangible and verifiable.  Or scrap it altogether.
>>
>> At the bottom of the git-scm.com page there is this blurb:
>>
>>   This open sourced site is hosted on GitHub.
>>   Patches, suggestions and comments are welcome
>>
>> And that text contains a link to the GitHub repository[1] where anyone
>> can propose modifications to the page. Unfortunately I don't know of
>> anyone paying out contribution stipends for content changes made to
>> git-scm.com.
>
> Yeah, thanks for the cheap shot.  I already understood that category B
> is subject to contempt.  Congrats on being category A or C.
>
>> [1] https://github.com/git/git-scm.com/blob/master/README.md#contributing
>
> Turns out that "anyone" is actually "anyone accepting the conditions for
> a GitHub account":
>
>     If you wish to contribute to this website, please fork it on GitHub,
>     push your change to a named branch, then send a pull request.
>
> I've read the rather longish Terms&Conditions of GitHub and found myself
> unwilling to agree to them.  Which does not mean that changing the ways
> of contributing to the Git website to accommodate me would make any
> sense since obviously I don't have a clue what a member of the "Git
> community" should be proud of and ashamed of and thus would be unable to
> make a meaningful proposal anyway even if I were into website
> programming.