chore: Add an explanatory note about the OG split to top of README.md#40
Open
donaldguy wants to merge 1 commit into
Open
chore: Add an explanatory note about the OG split to top of README.md#40donaldguy wants to merge 1 commit into
donaldguy wants to merge 1 commit into
Conversation
Author
|
A lighter weight option that may suffice (but only occurred to me during writing the above PR description… the first time) would be to set the repo url to https://logseq.io/p/e3YDyX5AYr or similar |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
I became aware of the split here by virtue of my
brew updateproducing:and was curious enough to run
brew home logseq-ogand end up here. While I did see the "(file based)" in this repo's description, (as someone who hasn't been following dev of Logseq), I was unable to answer my immediate question of "As opposed to what?" in my first 3 attempts of:(while I would have succeeded if I'd gone perhaps one further and looked at that repo's newest release, I in fact switched over to the different tact of seeing what the person who had contributed the formula/cask had said )
I think it is appropriate to include an easily locatable explanation to answer this question.
I was feeling generous this afternoon to jump through the various hoops to offer this PR (as my first contribution to Logseq) as one such option
Feel free to change the format of the callout to
[!NOTE], etc. if you think it a better fit, etc.