Alan Braslau
Being open source does not require that there be a "repository", rather that the source (to Context) be freely available.
Yes, being open source is not equivalent to having an official repository. On the other hand, official repositories with pull access for everyone arguably are the de facto standard in the open source world. It has its conveniences, especally the ability to continually rebase unfinished and/or unpublished changes on top of the most recent official development. It, out of the box, provides all that I may want to have track of with effectively minimal extra hassle/bookkeeping. The primary workflow in this community is different and does not per se provide these conveniences. However, from the answers by Mojca and Hans, it is clear that it is not at all that complex to reconstruct a/the de facto standard workflow for a contributor, without Hans having to change his workflow. Some open questions remain. But nothing serious. However, for now I will not do it. Instead, I will let the following weeks and months test the following hypothesis: "The lack of the (percieved) convenience provided by the de facto standard is not really inconvenient (here and for what I really have to contribute)." When that hypothesis gets falsified, I will have more to say.