Like which providers?

I totally agree. We have a file for each chapter. We might just keep a trunk based approach mainly, and resort to short lived branches to allow writers to get their contributions reviewed.

Thank you for the advice

We opted for each file as a chapter. We already have the general structure. We are wondering what is the best approach. Maybe we should not have branches at all(?)

To be honest, in the beginning, I started with a branch for my own version of some chapters. We thought it was ok and merged into main. Maybe if we are going to use branches at all, having a branch for each author could make sense. We need to discuss this

This is great advice. I don’t believe we need a “stable” version. I mean, at a certain point our work will be ready and that’s it. We are not going to have different releases. We will have other formats (like a shorter version of this report), but in that case those would live as a different repository I guess

Yeah, I agree. I mean, we have different files for different chapters. So I guess a trunk based approach would work. Benefits from using a branch for each chapter variations might be needed, but only in specific cases. And to be honest, I think this does not really applies to us

Thank you for your reply! What are the “objects” possibly determining a branch? Features? Chapters? Writers? Releases?

This is exactly what I am looking for. I am interested also in how other federated applications do it. I had a look at Pixelfed’s documentation, but they don’t seem to have an API for that… Do you know anything about other services?

This is very helpful. Unfortunately the source code is not available… How did you find this service? Maybe you can point me to some other resource

deleted by creator