Difference between revisions of "Talk:Git"

From GnuCash
Jump to: navigation, search
(Multiple branches in separate directories?)
(Section Patches and Pull Requests: new section)
 
Line 16: Line 16:
  
 
Page updated now - if found OK, this question can be removed.
 
Page updated now - if found OK, this question can be removed.
 +
 +
== Section Patches and Pull Requests ==
 +
 +
This section needs some review with GitHub in Mind:
 +
* Trivial changes can be merged at github
 +
* When commited by the reviewer, the commit message should mention PR#...
 +
Which is preferred? ...
 +
 +
At https://github.com/Gnucash/gnucash-htdocs/pull/#/files one can ''Review changes'' with
 +
* Comment (only)
 +
* Approve or
 +
* Request changes
 +
How to continue as
 +
* Author
 +
: follow up commit or amended commit?
 +
::Amend and force push seems the wrong way because changes will become unreadable at GitHub.
 +
* Reviewer
 +
...
 +
 +
* Should it stay here or should we create a specific GitHub page?
 +
--[[User:Fell|Fell]] ([[User talk:Fell|talk]]) 21:26, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 21:26, 9 May 2017

how about

svn info http://svn.gnucash.org/repo/gnucash/trunk/

to get the latest version number, then with the correct revision number:

git svn clone -r[rev#] http://svn.gnucash.org/repo/gnucash/trunk .
git svn rebase

worked for me (I think) --Tim abell 17:34, 29 May 2008 (EDT)

Multiple branches in separate directories?

[1] recommends that if you work with multiple branches, to have each branch in a separate local Git clone because checking out branches causes Git to change all files and thus forces a full build when you next run make.

Has this been verified? From what I understand, checking out Git topic branches only causes Git to change files which are actually different--files which have the same content across both the branches are left untouched.

[1] http://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Git#Multi-Branch_Setup

Page updated now - if found OK, this question can be removed.

Section Patches and Pull Requests

This section needs some review with GitHub in Mind:

  • Trivial changes can be merged at github
  • When commited by the reviewer, the commit message should mention PR#...

Which is preferred? ...

At https://github.com/Gnucash/gnucash-htdocs/pull/#/files one can Review changes with

  • Comment (only)
  • Approve or
  • Request changes

How to continue as

  • Author
follow up commit or amended commit?
Amend and force push seems the wrong way because changes will become unreadable at GitHub.
  • Reviewer

...

  • Should it stay here or should we create a specific GitHub page?

--Fell (talk) 21:26, 9 May 2017 (UTC)