On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 8:10 PM, Chad Clabaugh <chadclaba...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> As a relatively new contributor to Fossil I am uncertain what the process
> is, and what to expect, after pushing changes to Fossil
I can share my experience as from contributing in the past if it helps you.
First off - subscribe to the fossil-dev list. This post should probably go
there.
Anything non-trivial (i.e. anything other than a typo correction or comment
etc.) should go in a branch. Name it something sensible, or if you are
unsure, just name it "chads" or something. It is generally a good idea to
share what you are working on with the mailing list. Sometimes someone will
be able to point you to a previous effort to do something similar. Unless
you are working on a major feature or have questions along the way, you're
branch will usually be pretty much ignored (in the good sense - fell free
to do whatever you want there) until you feel it is ready for testing. When
it is, post on the ML describing what it does and the state it is in,
asking for it to be tested/merged. One of the fossil Powers-That-Be will
look at it and comment on it / merge it, usually within a day or so.
Those old abandoned branches you see are likely someone started a feature
and abandoned it for whatever reason. Fossil as a rule does not allow
removing these started branches ("History is immutable"), and they don't
bother anyone.
My experience was that, as a new programmer who was looking for something
to contribute too, the fossil dev community was very nice and easy to work
with, which made entry a lot easier.
Baruch
--
˙uʍop-ǝpısdn sı ɹoʇıuoɯ ɹnoʎ 'sıɥʇ pɐǝɹ uɐɔ noʎ ɟı
_______________________________________________
fossil-users mailing list
fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
