How ready are DHers to use GitHub for non-code projects? « Digital Humanities Questions & Answers

Digital Humanities Questions & Answers » Applications, Tools, Formats

How ready are DHers to use GitHub for non-code projects?

(5 posts) (5 voices)

Asked 4 years ago by Patrick Murray-John
Latest answer from Shane Landrum

Tags:

Patrick Murray-John
I've been seeing increasing interest and activity around using GitHub for non-code projects, for example Lincoln Mullen's Profhacker post on How to fork a syllabus on GitHub. So I want to take a reading on how ready DHers in general are to use GitHub in that way, and even more, to fork a project, make changes both by adding files (similar to Zotero group functionality) and editing existing files (similar to wiki functionality), and issue a pull request to bring the changes back into the original repository.

As an example, I'm considering putting together a big set of materials useful for doing Omeka training sessions. I'd invite people both to add their handouts or files, and edit the list of possible lessons and activities, which are in a markdown file (again, Lincoln Mullen has a Profhacker post: Markdown: The syntax you probably already know. It will also include code samples and activities, which is what first made me think of GitHub. In theory, intro to Omeka materials could be built up this way. But practically, would I lose too many potential contributors?
Tweet this question
Posted 4 years ago Permalink
lmullen
Member

Using GitHub for a project that wants widespread participation seems like a risk to me. For example, I'm using GitHub for one project and the collaborators are reluctant to learn GitHub. (It might also have something to do with code.) But you do have the relative easiness of the GitHub website working for you. With links to GitHub's documentation, I would hope this could work.

You might be able to offer an alternative way for people to participate if they don't want to learn GitHub. For example, you might offer to add people's documents to the repository if they e-mail them to you.

Posted 4 years ago Permalink
Jason Heppler
Member

I would agree with Lincoln -- there's a potential risk in contributors turning away from contributing if they had to use Github. But, I really like the idea of using Github for things that aren't code projects. I've been using Github in ways that aren't necessarily tied to strictly code. For example, my CV resides there, and I also archive all my blog posts with Github. I've also just moved the full text of The Rubyist Historian to Github (in part to offer a way for others to add to or modify the document if they choose to, but also to make distribution/reading easier and build in redundant backups).

Another advantage you might have, in addition to Github's easiness as a website, are the GUI interfaces that are available. I totally understand that CLI interaction can seem intimidating especially for those who don't spend any time there. But, using something like Github for Mac makes it easy to fork, add files, modify files, etc. and perhaps helps overcome some reluctance to use Github. If the kinds of contributors you envision for this are generally DHers, you might be able to assume some basic level of familiarity with git or svn that overcomes any misgivings among contributors.

Posted 4 years ago Permalink
Ben Brumfield
Member

One development worth watching may be the rise of non-code GitHub repositories among the development community. The New Haven Ruby user group has started using the GitHub wiki interface for conference notes and invited other conference-goers to contribute, whether from outside the New Haven group or from other conferences. I'm not entirely clear why this seems to work better than any other wiki, however -- perhaps because Ruby conference attendees are already on GitHub and have GitHub accounts?

Posted 4 years ago Permalink
Shane Landrum
Member

I'm using BitBucket to host my own private Git repositories for writing in Markdown and LaTeX--- including my dissertation text. But I think the key problem with GitHub or similar for non-code projects is that the conventions of discussion and commenting used in programming communities (bug databases, mailing lists) aren't common among humanists (yet?).

(For example: If you're GitHubbing a Markdown document and someone has a problem with a wording, do they drop their quibble in an HTML comment next to the sentence? Do they fork the repository, make the change, then file a pull request?)

I was recently discussing finding aids with a bunch of archivists, and the topic was how to enable archives users to contribute their knowledge back into an electronic finding aid. For me as a programmer, "use a version control system!" was an obvious answer, but it didn't fly in the real world. They would have required specific training in how and why to use version control; they currently use Word to edit their finding aids; and supporting them as they learned to use version control (of any sort) would have required additional tech staff they didn't have the money for. So, they're back to edit-locks on network drives and walking over to one another's desks to resolve the edit locks.

In short: GitHub (or other version control) for non-code projects is a great idea for people who are comfortable climbing technical learning curves. Those who are already self-identified DHers may fall into that category. On the other hand, any project worth doing hopefully relies on subject-area knowledge from participants who've spent their energy learning non-technical skills and may not want to learn version control. I'd be leery of deploying GitHub by fiat in such an environment without having a team member who can support those participants' needs.

Posted 4 years ago Permalink

RSS feed for this topic

Reply

You must log in to post.