Re: Contributor Guide "volunteers" needed

[Maximilian Albert]

2009/1/18 Graham Percival <address@hidden>:
> On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 03:47:34PM +0100, Maximilian Albert wrote:
>> 2009/1/18 Graham Percival <address@hidden>:
>>
>> > - can somebody maoing check the maoing git commands in CG 1
>> >  already?  Either somebody with a big internet connection, or
>>
>> Done. All of them work fine (but se the comment on 1.3.1 below).
>
> By "work fine", I also want to know that:
> - future pulls work with simply "git pull" or "git pull origin"
>  (whatever is listed in that section)
> - creating patches works with whatever the command is
>  (whether that's "git-format-patch HEAD or MASTER or whatever)

Should this take the possibility into account that people are able to
create their own branches? Or would it be OK to assume they work on
master (because if they know how to create branches they also know how
to use these commands)?

Anyway, when I "reset --hard" the master branch to a previous commit
(so that it differs from remotes/origin/master and I don't have to
wait for any of the developers to commit something to the remote
branch) then both "git pull" and "git pull origin" work fine to
synchronize master and remotes/origin/master again. This only applies
if there are no local changes, though. In case there are, then issuing
either command produces a merge commit so that the commit graph now
looks like this:

  * master after merging
  |\
  | \
  |  \
  * * remotes/origin/master (on the right)
   \ |
    \|
     *
     |

I'm not sure if this constellation can cause problems when producing
patches. It seems that the command "git-format-patch origin" works
fine, though (Rainer, thanks for pointing out that this should be the
correct command).

I personally prefer to checkout the remote branch before pulling and
then doing a rebase:

   git-checkout remotes/origin/master
   git-pull
   git-rebase remotes/origin/master master

This produces a linear history, which I personally find "cleaner". :-)
But I suppose that "git-format-patch origin" does the right thing in
both situations. I don't know what you prefer to be included in the
CG.


> - "git push" or "git push origin" or whatever works for users with
>  commit ability.
>
> This isn't directed at you (I don't think you can test point #3),

Correct.

Max