I clicked on pharo-project remote and I did fetch. thinking stupidly
that it will update my local repo.

And I get the following .... and I do not understand whay I get 1965
not published. and I do not

Then I siwtched branch and went back to development.
and I should be able to now push to my remote.
So I tried but I'm totally unsure if this is correct.



On Sat, Dec 16, 2017 at 5:55 PM, Stephane Ducasse
<[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Esteban
>
> Now how can I maintain my fork up to date?
> This is not in the tutorial and to me it was a major problem and a big
> source of pain.
> Stef
>
> On Sat, Dec 16, 2017 at 5:39 PM, Stephane Ducasse
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> I committed my code for issue 20861 and I do not understand what I see
>>
>> I do not understand why I get local changes with empty packages. :(
>>
>> Stef
>>
>> On Sat, Dec 16, 2017 at 5:32 PM, Stephane Ducasse
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> I did a little pass on the wiki to make the flow clearer
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Dec 16, 2017 at 5:26 PM, Stephane Ducasse
>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> In the tutorial:
>>>>
>>>> - Put a little heading before
>>>>
>>>> "You need to add pharo repository as a remote
>>>> ([email protected]:pharo-project/pharo.git)."
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Dec 16, 2017 at 5:25 PM, Stephane Ducasse
>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>> I double clicked and it did a massive amount of stuff and finally told
>>>>> me that it is up to date.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sat, Dec 16, 2017 at 5:24 PM, Stephane Ducasse
>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>> OK so I restarted everything from scratch:
>>>>>> - deleted my fork
>>>>>> - reforked
>>>>>> - clone pharo again
>>>>>> - here is some feedback
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In the tutorial add /pharo + src in the screenshot
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Then when I add the local repository I get uncommited changes and I do
>>>>>> not understand why?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sat, Dec 16, 2017 at 9:57 AM, Esteban Lorenzano <[email protected]> 
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 16 Dec 2017, at 09:42, Alistair Grant <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi Esteban,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 16 December 2017 at 09:05, Esteban Lorenzano <[email protected]> 
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 15 Dec 2017, at 17:37, Alistair Grant <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi Esteban,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I had no problems following the process (Ubuntu 16.04,
>>>>>>> Pharo7.0-32bit-e175bc2.image, fogbugz 20872). :-)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I guess that you have already thought of this, but...  Is there any
>>>>>>> reason why we can't just put up a dialog asking for the user's github
>>>>>>> credentials and fogbugz issue number and then automatically clone the
>>>>>>> repository, configure the upstream remote and create the issue branch.
>>>>>>> That would remove most of the remaining manual steps.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I realise that it only works for option 1, although where people
>>>>>>> configure a common pharo-local, it could check for a pre-existing
>>>>>>> clone and use that one.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "I realise” means you tried and it didn’t work?
>>>>>>> because in my tests it worked as good as the first one (I tested on
>>>>>>> windows), but that may need to be “re-validated” :)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Esteban
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The contribution process works fine (even on linux :-)).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The "I realise" paragraph is a comment on my suggestion to try and
>>>>>>> reduce the number of manual steps required (and is actually wrong).
>>>>>>> Just to rephrase (and extend) the suggestion, I think we could create
>>>>>>> a single dialog that currently covers the following steps (from your
>>>>>>> instructions):
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 1. Clone a fresh repository, or point to an existing repository.
>>>>>>> 2. Tell Iceberg about pharo-project
>>>>>>> 3. Create a new branch from the fogbugz issue
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ah, I got lost in translation ;)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Esteban
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>> Alistair
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>> Alistair
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 14 December 2017 at 13:19, Esteban Lorenzano <[email protected]> 
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I’m working on simplifying the contribution process, after collecting
>>>>>>> opinions/experiences last couple of months.
>>>>>>> As you know, Pharo contribution process is still WIP and we aim to have 
>>>>>>> it
>>>>>>> as smooth as possible for Pharo 7.0 release. Now, after observe the 
>>>>>>> idea of
>>>>>>> the “system repositories” was a bad idea because it introduced extra 
>>>>>>> and non
>>>>>>> standard “path” to contribution, I managed to remove that to reestablish
>>>>>>> “the regular way”: you will now need to add pharo repository just as any
>>>>>>> other repository you add, by cloning or adding local repository.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I took Guille’s doc and moved it to pharo project (it does not has 
>>>>>>> sense to
>>>>>>> have it living in a contributor’s repository when is so important). You 
>>>>>>> can
>>>>>>> find it here:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/wiki/Contribute-a-fix-to-Pharo
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This document is also updated to reveal this new process, please read 
>>>>>>> it.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> How to update your startup scripts?
>>>>>>> Some people has added startup scripts to easy the first part of
>>>>>>> contribution. Instead enabling system repositories, etc. you now need to
>>>>>>> replace that with this:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> (IceRepositoryCreator new
>>>>>>> location: '/path/to/pharo-project/pharo' asFileReference;
>>>>>>> subdirectory: 'src';
>>>>>>> createRepository)
>>>>>>> register
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE… take a moment to read and try the document. Is 
>>>>>>> very
>>>>>>> important that document reflects new process and works reliable in 
>>>>>>> different
>>>>>>> scenarios (I validated it on macOS and Windows, and assumed it worked 
>>>>>>> fine
>>>>>>> on linux but you know… bad assumptions is the base of failure ;) )
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I’m eager to hear your feedback and continue enhancing the process.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> (yes, Stef, I know UI is still cumbersome… I’m working on that :) )
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> cheers!
>>>>>>> Esteban
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>

Reply via email to