Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC pre-GLEP] Gentoo Git Workflow

On 09/10/17 18:13, Daniel Campbell wrote: > I'm not looking for political propaganda. What would I gain from it? I > don't really have any strong connections here. In fact I'm probably > ticking a few people off. I'm calling your practices out for what they > are, since nobody else appears willing

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC pre-GLEP] Gentoo Git Workflow

On 09/10/2017 02:34 AM, Michał Górny wrote: > W dniu nie, 10.09.2017 o godzinie 00∶39 -0700, użytkownik Daniel > Campbell napisał: >> On 09/09/2017 12:47 AM, Michał Górny wrote: >>> W dniu pią, 08.09.2017 o godzinie 17∶19 -0400, użytkownik Rich Freeman >>> napisał: On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC pre-GLEP] Gentoo Git Workflow

W dniu nie, 10.09.2017 o godzinie 00∶39 -0700, użytkownik Daniel Campbell napisał: > On 09/09/2017 12:47 AM, Michał Górny wrote: > > W dniu pią, 08.09.2017 o godzinie 17∶19 -0400, użytkownik Rich Freeman > > napisał: > > > On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 4:05 AM, Michał Górny wrote: >

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC pre-GLEP] Gentoo Git Workflow

On 09/09/2017 12:47 AM, Michał Górny wrote: > W dniu pią, 08.09.2017 o godzinie 17∶19 -0400, użytkownik Rich Freeman > napisał: >> On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 4:05 AM, Michał Górny wrote: >>> >>> What do you think about it? Is there anything else that needs being >>> covered? >>>

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC pre-GLEP] Gentoo Git Workflow

On Sat, Sep 9, 2017 at 3:47 AM, Michał Górny wrote: > W dniu pią, 08.09.2017 o godzinie 17∶19 -0400, użytkownik Rich Freeman > napisał: >> >> FYI - if anybody does want to make any comments on the proposed >> devmanual changes to implement the new tags please comment at: >> >>

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC pre-GLEP] Gentoo Git Workflow

W dniu pią, 08.09.2017 o godzinie 17∶19 -0400, użytkownik Rich Freeman napisał: > On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 4:05 AM, Michał Górny wrote: > > > > What do you think about it? Is there anything else that needs being > > covered? > > > > FYI - if anybody does want to make any

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC pre-GLEP] Gentoo Git Workflow

On 09/08/2017 11:19 PM, Rich Freeman wrote: > FYI - if anybody does want to make any comments on the proposed > devmanual changes to implement the new tags please comment at: > > https://github.com/gentoo/devmanual.gentoo.org/pull/72 > > For that matter, if you want to even know what the

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC pre-GLEP] Gentoo Git Workflow

On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 4:05 AM, Michał Górny wrote: > > What do you think about it? Is there anything else that needs being > covered? > FYI - if anybody does want to make any comments on the proposed devmanual changes to implement the new tags please comment at:

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC pre-GLEP] Gentoo Git Workflow

Am Dienstag, 25. Juli 2017, 10:05:06 CEST schrieb Michał Górny: > Hi, everyone. > > There have been multiple attempts at grasping this but none so far > resulted in something official and indisputable. At the same time, we > end having to point our users at semi-official guides which change > in

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC pre-GLEP] Gentoo Git Workflow

On 07/27/2017 04:11 PM, Michał Górny wrote: >> Right, so github automatically closes pull requests when encountering >> Closes, that doesn't indicate that Closes can't be used for other >> platforms to do similar things, or closing things manually if provided >> through other channels. The current

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC pre-GLEP] Gentoo Git Workflow

On czw, 2017-07-27 at 16:08 +0200, Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote: > On 07/27/2017 03:58 PM, Michał Górny wrote: > > > > > > ** Closes: > > > > > > https://github.com/gentoo/gentoo/pull/ > > > > > ki>; — to automatically close a GitHub pull request, > > > > > > > > > > Is this a generic tag for

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC pre-GLEP] Gentoo Git Workflow

On 07/27/2017 03:58 PM, Michał Górny wrote: > ** Closes: https://github.com/gentoo/gentoo/pull/ ki>; — to automatically close a GitHub pull request, Is this a generic tag for any pull request of any platform? >>> No. As I've told multiple times already, there are *no* generic

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC pre-GLEP] Gentoo Git Workflow

On czw, 2017-07-27 at 15:54 +0200, Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote: > On 07/27/2017 03:52 PM, Michał Górny wrote: > > On śro, 2017-07-26 at 19:17 +0200, Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote: > > > On 07/25/2017 10:05 AM, Michał Górny wrote: > > > > ** Fixes: https://bugs.gentoo.org/NN;;; > > > > — > > > >

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC pre-GLEP] Gentoo Git Workflow

On 07/27/2017 03:52 PM, Michał Górny wrote: > On śro, 2017-07-26 at 19:17 +0200, Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote: >> On 07/25/2017 10:05 AM, Michał Górny wrote: >>> ** Fixes: https://bugs.gentoo.org/NN;; — >>> to indicate a fixed bug, >> >> At this point fixes is overloading >>> ** Fixes:

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC pre-GLEP] Gentoo Git Workflow

On śro, 2017-07-26 at 19:17 +0200, Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote: > On 07/25/2017 10:05 AM, Michał Górny wrote: > > ** Fixes: https://bugs.gentoo.org/NN;; — > > to indicate a fixed bug, > > At this point fixes is overloading > > ** Fixes: commit-id (commit message) — to indicate fixing a > >

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC pre-GLEP] Gentoo Git Workflow

On 07/26/2017 07:20 PM, Rich Freeman wrote: > I was thinking that it would make far more sense to use "Bug" for > Gentoo bugs, and use something like "Reference" or "Remote-Bug" for > non-Gentoo bugs. 99% of the time commits will reference a Gentoo bug. I like the idea of Reference for URL

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC pre-GLEP] Gentoo Git Workflow

On 07/26/2017 07:20 PM, Rich Freeman wrote: > Also, I suggest using either URLs or bug numbers, but not both. > Otherwise you end up having to copy the URL over, then copy the ID > only and paste it in the summary. That is an extra step. I wouldn't have bug ID in summary at all unless it

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC pre-GLEP] Gentoo Git Workflow

On Wed, Jul 26, 2017 at 1:04 PM, Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote: > On 07/26/2017 11:21 AM, Ulrich Mueller wrote: >> The same applies to #123456 in the summary line, though. I don't see a >> good reason for using a URL after the "Bug:" keyword as long as bare >> numbers are used

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC pre-GLEP] Gentoo Git Workflow

On 07/25/2017 10:05 AM, Michał Górny wrote: > ** Fixes: https://bugs.gentoo.org/NN; — > to indicate a fixed bug, At this point fixes is overloading > ** Fixes: commit-id (commit message) — to indicate fixing a > previous commit This use should be forbidden. > ** Bug:

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC pre-GLEP] Gentoo Git Workflow

On 07/26/2017 11:21 AM, Ulrich Mueller wrote: > The same applies to #123456 in the summary line, though. I don't see a > good reason for using a URL after the "Bug:" keyword as long as bare > numbers are used elsewhere. For Bug you'd often refer to upstream reports or other distros, so you need

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC pre-GLEP] Gentoo Git Workflow

On 07/25/2017 01:25 PM, Michael Orlitzky wrote: > There are two main advantages over having the bug number in the summary. > Space is at a premium in the summary, as Tobias pointed out, and the > > Gentoo-Bug: whatever > > format is trivially machine-readable, whereas sticking it somewhere

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC pre-GLEP] Gentoo Git Workflow

On 7/25/2017 4:05 AM, Michał Górny wrote: > Hi, everyone. > > There have been multiple attempts at grasping this but none so far > resulted in something official and indisputable. At the same time, we > end having to point our users at semi-official guides which change > in unpredictable ways. >

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC pre-GLEP] Gentoo Git Workflow

> On Tue, 25 Jul 2017, Michał Górny wrote: > On wto, 2017-07-25 at 09:26 -0400, Rich Freeman wrote: >> There would also be less variation. Bug: 123456 is pretty >> unambiguous as a reference. When you start having http vs https and >> maybe a few different ways of creating a URL to a bug it

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC pre-GLEP] Gentoo Git Workflow

On wto, 2017-07-25 at 18:46 -0400, Rich Freeman wrote: > On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 6:30 PM, Michał Górny wrote: > > On wto, 2017-07-25 at 18:26 -0400, Rich Freeman wrote: > > > On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 4:29 PM, Mike Gilbert wrote: > > > > On Tue, Jul 25, 2017

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC pre-GLEP] Gentoo Git Workflow

On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 6:30 PM, Michał Górny wrote: > On wto, 2017-07-25 at 18:26 -0400, Rich Freeman wrote: >> On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 4:29 PM, Mike Gilbert wrote: >> > On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 12:12 PM, Michael Orlitzky wrote: >> > > On

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC pre-GLEP] Gentoo Git Workflow

On wto, 2017-07-25 at 18:26 -0400, Rich Freeman wrote: > On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 4:29 PM, Mike Gilbert wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 12:12 PM, Michael Orlitzky wrote: > > > On 07/25/2017 09:23 AM, Michał Górny wrote: > > > > > > > > How is that

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC pre-GLEP] Gentoo Git Workflow

On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 4:29 PM, Mike Gilbert wrote: > On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 12:12 PM, Michael Orlitzky wrote: >> On 07/25/2017 09:23 AM, Michał Górny wrote: >>> >>> How is that relevant? Revision bumps are merely a tool to encourage >>> 'automatic'

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC pre-GLEP] Gentoo Git Workflow

On wto, 2017-07-25 at 16:31 -0400, Michael Orlitzky wrote: > On 07/25/2017 04:29 PM, Mike Gilbert wrote: > > > > I don't feel I should be obligated by policy to support this use case. > > One revbump per push seems sufficiently safe for 99.9% of users. > > > > If you want to do more revbumps,

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC pre-GLEP] Gentoo Git Workflow

On 07/25/2017 04:29 PM, Mike Gilbert wrote: > > I don't feel I should be obligated by policy to support this use case. > One revbump per push seems sufficiently safe for 99.9% of users. > > If you want to do more revbumps, you are free to do so. > Can I also delete packages and break the tree

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC pre-GLEP] Gentoo Git Workflow

On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 12:12 PM, Michael Orlitzky wrote: > On 07/25/2017 09:23 AM, Michał Górny wrote: >> >> How is that relevant? Revision bumps are merely a tool to encourage >> 'automatic' rebuilds of packages during @world upgrade. I can't think of >> a single use case where

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC pre-GLEP] Gentoo Git Workflow

On 07/25/2017 09:23 AM, Michał Górny wrote: > > How is that relevant? Revision bumps are merely a tool to encourage > 'automatic' rebuilds of packages during @world upgrade. I can't think of > a single use case where somebody would actually think it sane to > checkout one commit after another,

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC pre-GLEP] Gentoo Git Workflow

On wto, 2017-07-25 at 09:26 -0400, Rich Freeman wrote: > On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 7:52 AM, Michał Górny wrote: > > > > Except that there is no machines using it. In all contexts, using full URL > > for machine readability is better as it works with all software out of the > >

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC pre-GLEP] Gentoo Git Workflow

On wto, 2017-07-25 at 08:54 -0400, Joshua Kinard wrote: > On 07/25/2017 04:05, Michał Górny wrote: > > Hi, everyone. > > > > There have been multiple attempts at grasping this but none so far > > resulted in something official and indisputable. At the same time, we > > end having to point our

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC pre-GLEP] Gentoo Git Workflow

On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 7:52 AM, Michał Górny wrote: > > Except that there is no machines using it. In all contexts, using full URL > for machine readability is better as it works with all software out of the > box. > Until the domain name of the bugzilla server changes/etc.

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC pre-GLEP] Gentoo Git Workflow

On wto, 2017-07-25 at 08:26 -0400, Michael Orlitzky wrote: > On 07/25/2017 07:52 AM, Michał Górny wrote: > > > > I have no clue what you mean. I'm just saying that if you push 10 > > changes in 10 commits, you don't have to go straight to -r10 in a > > single push. > > > > Exactly. Do that

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC pre-GLEP] Gentoo Git Workflow

On 07/25/2017 04:05, Michał Górny wrote: > Hi, everyone. > > There have been multiple attempts at grasping this but none so far > resulted in something official and indisputable. At the same time, we > end having to point our users at semi-official guides which change > in unpredictable ways. >

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC pre-GLEP] Gentoo Git Workflow

On 07/25/2017 07:52 AM, Michał Górny wrote: > > I have no clue what you mean. I'm just saying that if you push 10 > changes in 10 commits, you don't have to go straight to -r10 in a > single push. > Exactly. Do that instead of hoping that no one checks out your intermediate commits. There's no

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC pre-GLEP] Gentoo Git Workflow

Dnia 25 lipca 2017 13:25:38 CEST, Michael Orlitzky napisał(a): >On 07/25/2017 04:05 AM, Michał Górny wrote: >> >> Here's the current draft: >> https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/User:MGorny/GLEP:Git >> > >It's mostly fine, but there are two changes I disagree with: > >> When doing

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC pre-GLEP] Gentoo Git Workflow

Hi everyone, > Here's the current draft: > https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/User:MGorny/GLEP:Git > > The basic idea is that the GLEP provides basic guidelines for using git, > and then we write a proper manual on top of it (right now, all the pages > about it end up as a mix of requirements and a

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC pre-GLEP] Gentoo Git Workflow

Dnia 25 lipca 2017 12:59:21 CEST, Tobias Klausmann napisał(a): >Hi! > >On Tue, 25 Jul 2017, Michał Górny wrote: >> The summary line is included in the short logs (git log -- >> oneline, gitweb, GitHub, mail subject) and therefore should >> provide a short yet accurate

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC pre-GLEP] Gentoo Git Workflow

On 07/25/2017 04:05 AM, Michał Górny wrote: > > Here's the current draft: > https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/User:MGorny/GLEP:Git > It's mostly fine, but there are two changes I disagree with: > When doing one or more changes that require a revision bump, bump the > revision in the commit

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC pre-GLEP] Gentoo Git Workflow

Hi! On Tue, 25 Jul 2017, Michał Górny wrote: > The summary line is included in the short logs (git log -- > oneline, gitweb, GitHub, mail subject) and therefore should > provide a short yet accurate description of the change. The summary line > starts with a logical unit name, followed by a

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC pre-GLEP] Gentoo Git Workflow

On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 10:05 AM, Michał Górny wrote: > What do you think about it? Is there anything else that needs being > covered? > Looks good to me. Thanks for writing it up! Cheers, Dirkjan

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC pre-GLEP] Gentoo Git Workflow

On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 10:05:06AM +0200, Michał Górny wrote: Hi, everyone. There have been multiple attempts at grasping this but none so far resulted in something official and indisputable. At the same time, we end having to point our users at semi-official guides which change in

[gentoo-dev] [RFC pre-GLEP] Gentoo Git Workflow

Hi, everyone. There have been multiple attempts at grasping this but none so far resulted in something official and indisputable. At the same time, we end having to point our users at semi-official guides which change in unpredictable ways. Here's the current draft: