Hi Guille,
On 13 April 2018 at 17:29, Guillermo Polito <guillermopol...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, Apr 13, 2018 at 5:15 PM, Alistair Grant <akgrant0...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> On 13 April 2018 at 17:07, Cyril Ferlicot <cyril.ferli...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > On ven. 13 avr. 2018 at 17:03, Guillermo Polito
>> > <guillermopol...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> The thing is that the best way to do it is to clone your own fork...
>> >> And each one has her/his one.
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> > What your can do is display the list of forks and ask to select the
>> > right one. Then it will create the Pharo repo with the two remotes.
>>
>
> This would be strange. Pharo has 75 forks...
>
>>
>>
>> I was going to suggest prompting for the git username. You can
>> substitute it in to:
>>
>> g...@github.com:{username}/pharo.git
>>
>> and add upstream (pharo-project).
>
>
> Yes, and if it does not exist we have to use github's API to create the
> fork...
Advertising
I hadn't even thought of this, I was assuming that the fork had
already been created.
I still think this would be useful, especially for regular
contributors who like to start with a clean image when development a
PR.
> It's doable... But doing it well will take time:
> - I would like a UI where I explain users what I will do with their git
> credentials
> - I would like to prevent them that I'm doing a fork before doing it
> - I want to show a good progress bar
> - I want to wait until github's finished with the fork (it's an async
> operation) before continuing with the process
> - And then, I want that if possible iceberg is well (automatically) tested
> because there are so many corner cases that it starts to be really
> complicated to do it manually.
>
> But also our plate is full with other things, and we have to prioritize...
>
> If someone wants to give it a try, I can give a hand, review, test,
> advice...
Fair enough.
Would you be willing to accept a patch that requires an existing fork?
Cheers,
Alistair
