Update implementerAgreements.md

[klacol]

Hi, I try a first PR to understand the system. Am I doing it right?

[bigdoods]

Hi Klaus,

There is separate branches for different data. You have made updates to IFC4.1.0.3 which corresponds to IFC4x1. Therefore only data associated with this version of the IFC schema belong to this branch. The idea is that each version of the IFC schema will have its own associated technologies and by keeping this as a central concept upstream, it will enable innovation moving forward in the schema because all of the dependencies can change without requiring backward compatibility. Without this approach, there would be lots of "if IFC4 do this, if IFC2x3 do that..."

If you would like to rectify this change,

1. revert updates to IFC4.1.0.3
2. checkout branch IFC2.3.1.0
3. update then open a new PR.

I hope this helps!

[bigdoods]

Klaus, I have come across a git function used to combine branches that will help you adjust this branch problem.

$ git checkout IFC4.1.0.3
$ git rebase IFC2.3.1.0

This works by 'rewinding' IFC4.1.0.3 to the commit hash and saves the changes in a temporary file. The IFC4.1.0.3 hash reference is then set and the changes are applied.

You can then get IFC2.3.1.0 to point at the final commit:

$ git checkout IFC2.3.1.0
$ git merge IFC4.1.0.3

Let me know if you need any help.

[klacol]

Hi John, thanks for the good explanation. I understand, that I should have made the changes and the PR to the branch of IFC2x3.

What I have done is, to transfer some pages from this url:

http://www.buildingsmart-tech.org/implementation/ifc-implementation/ifc-impl-agreements/ifc-impl-agreements-summary

to this GH repository.

The title of the source page is
"Summary and short overview of the implementer agreements for the IFC2x3 coordination view."
which indicates clearly, that this information belongs to IFC2x3.

I can follow you instruction (thank you for that) and make new PR for IFC2x3, but how would these Implemeters Agreements then be merged into the IFC4 branch? Or are they not valid for IFC4?.