[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Gitlab Migration

From: Clément Pit-Claudel
Subject: Re: Gitlab Migration
Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2021 02:04:49 -0400
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.11.0

On 8/27/21 1:51 AM, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>> Oh, that's not how it typically works in the project that I contribute to 
>> (and that I maintain): the maintainer often makes small fixes before 
>> merging, amends the relevant commits with those changes, and then merge 
>> using "git merge".  Did I misunderstand?
> AFAIK, merging a PM is usually a UI action.  But if it is done
> manually like you describe, then there's no difference, and no
> advantage to either method.

The UI action is available, but merging the branch in the git repository is 
enough.  The difference is (through forks) that every patch has its own branch.

> I've yet to see a serious project of reasonably large size and age
> that didn't have such a document.  Coding conventions and patch
> submission conventions vary among projects and change with time, and
> keeping them unwritten is not a good idea.

Of course.  The nice part about the web UIs is that bug-reporting instructions 
pop up automatically when you press the "report bug" button.

> And there's a difference between maintaining a project with perhaps
> several Ks or several dozen Ks of lines, and maintaining Emacs.  With
> Emacs we need all the power of the development environment
> conveniently integrated in the same place; we need Emacs itself.

Of course.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]