Re: Canonical pngcheck repo at github.com/pnggroup

On 2025-02-13 18:29, Cosmin Truta wrote:
> Greg, Chris, and anybody else who's interested in pngcheck,
>
> Could you please review my pngcheck history reconstruction, preferably 
> with a tool that does history visualization, from "git log --graph" to 
> VSCode and everything in between. (BTW, I use "tig" from the terminal, 
> which is lightning fast and freaking awesome.)
>
> https://github.com/ctruta/pngcheck

I used VSCode. History looks great.

> Greg: I included (I think) all source files that you gave me, with the 
> exception of "pngcheck-1.81-19950904-grr.c", which turned out to be an 
> evolutionary dead end. If you need time to go over those commits and 
> make sure that the history that I reconstructed from your files is 
> matching the one that you remember (however vaguely) you should know 
> that I'm not in a hurry. I'd rather be sure that you catch my error(s) 
> before I move it over to the official repo at github.com/pnggroup 
> <http://github.com/pnggroup>.
>
> Chris, Greg: Unlike the last time, when I rebased Chris' history over 
> Greg's history, this time around I kept Chris' history intact by doing 
> an octopus merge, which some people like, but others don't. An 
> advantage: it's a simple business-as-usual merge. A disadvantage: 
> those who habitually use "git log" and especially "git log --patch" 
> from the terminal will probably have a harder time than those who use 
> visual tools, at least for now. So, if you don't like that, for any 
> reason, and you'd rather prefer that I do what I did last time 
> instead, i.e. rebase Chris' history of recent modifications over 
> Greg's original history, please tell me, and I'll redo that.
I have no opinion, what you have looks fine to me.
>
> After you confirm that everything looks ok to you, we'll promote this 
> new tree to its canonical home at github.com/pnggroup/pngcheck 
> <http://github.com/pnggroup/pngcheck>.

Because of the repo transfer, we did lose the edit where the readme was 
changed from "unofficial" to "development" but that it trivial to do again.

There is also a recent PR which hasn't been approved, so is not in the 
history. I assume we won't lose that? Or the existing (open and closed) 
issues?

https://github.com/pnggroup/pngcheck/pull/19

>
> Sincerely,
> Cosmin

-- 
Chris Lilley
@svgeesus
Technical Director @ W3C
W3C Strategy Team, Core Web Design
W3C Architecture & Technology Team, Core Web & Media