On 12/11/2018 9:15 AM, Konstantin Khomoutov wrote:
I think an uspoken issue here is that while you're indeed free to "fork" this book and maintain your fork, having two books with almost identical contents may not be the best option as it simply may be outright confusing for those at whom your fork is actually targeted.
The coverage is almost identical, but the content is different.
That's just my opinion, or — better — feeling I gathered from the discussion, but to me these friendly nudges to maybe consider reevaluating your work for inclusion into the original's book proper look exactly as hints at that having such a fork may not be the best of all options.
You might be right, but the reception I got when working on the first edition led me to make the fork. In retrospect, I probably should have tried again with the new crew who did the second edition. As I said, I will try again if there's a third edition.
Another problem with the fork is its visibility. The go-to Git website links to the original work, and I assure you novice users do not casually read this list — let alone search through its archives for the mentions of an alternative book's version.
I agree, and I don't know what to do about that. Jon
