On 12/28/2012 10:27 PM, Matthew Flaschen wrote:
On 12/29/2012 01:06 AM, Arthur Richards wrote:
Thanks everyone for helping to clarify. The fact that there is still
confusion, uncertainty, and 'from my understating's though is
disconcerting. Can someone in the know document the actual
implications/guidelines/automated behavior/etc for this? And can someone
take responsibility for updating the documentation as this stuff evolves?
We should be able to refer ourselves and others to a definitive resource
when questions like this arise.
Be bold! The definitive source is
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Git/Workflow#How_we_review_code , but
there are some parts there that is obsolete. Don't wait for an expert
to come along and document everything. You can help too.
Along these lines, let me raise the attention for
Bug 36437 - A strict and correct Git workflow document is needed
https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=36437
and the effort that Dan has offered to lead to get this fixed:
http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/User:Dan-nl/Git_and_Gerrit
Please help Dan and help yourselves by commenting his proposals and
editing in any way that improves the current situation. Thank you!
--
Quim Gil
Technical Contributor Coordinator @ Wikimedia Foundation
http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/User:Qgil
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
