Menu
When I have a feature request on a library in github, I would either
More often than not, the original authors are happy to see the enhancements, and they'll either pull them as is, or merge them manually after some modifications.
The question is, what should I do with my fork projects after my commits have been accepted by the upstream? If I am not going to make any further updates, should I delete the repository? Or, should I keep it around for historical interest?
github does not really indicate whose copy is the "definitive" repository, so my inactive forks may distract other people from finding the right copy. In fact, I just got a pull request form someone, which was also accepted at the upstream.
374
Most commonly, forks are used to either propose changes to someone else's project to which you do not have write access, or to use someone else's project as a starting point for your own idea. You can fork a repository to create a copy of the repository and make changes without affecting the upstream repository.
Forking a repository allows you to freely experiment with changes without affecting the original project. Most commonly, forks are used to either propose changes to someone else's project or to use someone else's project as a starting point for your own idea.
Yes. If the original repository gets deleted, then the fork keeps all its commits, including the past commits. However, you will loose the line saying Forked from <User name>/<repository name> , i.e. there will be no more link to the original, now deleted, repository on GitHub.
If I have no interest in being an active contributor or developer, I usually delete mine after the patch has been accepted upstream. I don't see a need to keep the repo around for historical reasons -- the commit will already have my name and email, and the timestamp of the commit, so that seems to be all the historical record it really needs.
93
If you love us? You can donate to us via Paypal or buy me a coffee so we can maintain and grow! Thank you!
Donate Us With
