To admit - I really like the suggestion of the basic problem summary of:
- retaining the read-only (for humans) historical data
- allowing custom branches in a defined namespace along it under different ACL
- tools (e.g. git ubuntu) can add additional function/ease-of-access (it is great) but it should as far as possible work without it (that was a design point already so far)
As we have seen in the discussions opinions on details differ vastly, but I really would appreciate if we could find a way that works improving this for everyone while not creating a drawback for existing or planned use-cases.
We might need time and discussions to find that sweet spot in between, but I'd immediately have a few repos that I then would want to unite there instead of the distributed places they have today.
To admit - I really like the suggestion of the basic problem summary of: ease-of- access (it is great) but it should as far as possible work without it (that was a design point already so far)
- retaining the read-only (for humans) historical data
- allowing custom branches in a defined namespace along it under different ACL
- tools (e.g. git ubuntu) can add additional function/
As we have seen in the discussions opinions on details differ vastly, but I really would appreciate if we could find a way that works improving this for everyone while not creating a drawback for existing or planned use-cases.
We might need time and discussions to find that sweet spot in between, but I'd immediately have a few repos that I then would want to unite there instead of the distributed places they have today.