Am 05.08.2018 um 05:16 schrieb Mike Horvath:
> I create a lot of Wikipedia illustrations. I currently host the project
> files and source code on MediaFire. However, if something were to happen
> to me that resource would disappear after 1 year of inactivity.
> 
> I am considering using GitHub instead. Presumably it will be around for
> a while. Also, this seems most convenient for people interested in
> looking at the source code.
> 
> However, I don't want to create one repository for each illustration.
> And the images are licensed under several different licenses. (Mostly CC
> BY-SA. Some GFDL. Some public domain.) So putting them all in one
> repository might be problematic. Also, using one set of versioning
> records for multiple projects does not seem ideal.
> 
> What do you think would the best option for me to pursue? I like what I
> have now, but it (and I) could expire and the files could be lost.


No recommendation, just a few thoughts for consideration:


Having one repo for each illustration seems a bit overkill to me.


Different licenses in one repo are not an issue - at least not
technically. The display of the license name in the repo's title bar on
GitHub is an optional feature, not a must. If your license file is not
recognized as one of the standard licenses, no license name will be
displayed.

So you could go about the licensing thing by having a global
"LICENSE.txt" or "LICENSE.md" that just says "different licenses apply,
see individual directories", and place an individual license description
in each directory.


I presume that by "versioning records" you mean version numbers.

Git does not feature an inbuilt version number mechanism anyway. Yes,
each commit has a unique identifier which serves as something similar,
but those are more or less random and have no inherent order.

In a normal repository version numbers would be maintained using Git
"tags", by which you can give easier-to-memorize and/or sortable names
to selected commits. Often those tags would just be a version number,
e.g. `v3.8.0-alpha.87654321`.

In a repository hosting a collection of small projects, you could
prepend the name of the changed project to the tag, e.g.
`colorspace-hsl-v2.0`.


Placing multiple scenes in a single repo has the advantage that they can
share files such as include files or texture images.

It also has the advantage that you can add a script to re-render all the
images in one go.


As a last note, don't forget that between "one repository per
illustration" and "one repository to rule them all" there are other
alternatives. For instance, you could use one repo per licensing model;
or you could use one repo per topic, e.g. one repo for all colour models
and a separate repo for all map projections.

Post a reply to this message