On Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 10:14 AM David Sidrane <david.sidr...@nscdg.com> wrote: > My general comment on the Workflow document is it is too much information > and comments. > > Perhaps it can be broken into patch Workflow, git Workflow and githup > Workflow and then just list the steps. > (Think in terms of a quckstart guide for nuttx workflow) > > In reading it I am still not clear on the work instructions we want to > ultimately have and are currently using. > > Are the current workflow's work instructions (just the steps Alan, Greg etc > have been using) listed out in a document?
You could add a tl;dr section at the beginning, but I'd urge us to leave the longer explanations in place. Because my problem with terse git workflow instructions is that unless you're a git guru, they make about as much sense as: "To work on this project, all you have to do is fork this from here, clone that to there, pull this from that remote, push that to this remote, shove it over here, kick it over there, lift branch A up, yank branch B back, push branch C sideways, release branch B and let it snap into branch D, cut branch D off, float it downstream, raise it three inches, drop it, pull, push, and shove a few more times for good measure, sacrifice two chickens and a goat, and then open a pull request. Simple!" Cheers, Nathan
