cordova-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Braden Shepherdson <bra...@chromium.org>
Subject Re: Pull Requests and Re-writing History
Date Mon, 03 Mar 2014 20:47:01 GMT
That seems like a failing of those GUIs. When you git rebase -i from the
command line, it opens $EDITOR with the logs of all the commits that are
being squashed, but that's intended to give you context as you rewrite them
into a single, meaningful commit message that expresses the changes.

Braden


On Mon, Mar 3, 2014 at 2:37 PM, Shazron <shazron@gmail.com> wrote:

> Another thing that some Git GUIs do (like Tower) is when you squash, the
> log of commits you squash are appended to the commit message. Ugly, and not
> sure if its really useful for back-tracking purposes...
>
>
> On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 7:16 PM, Michal Mocny <mmocny@chromium.org> wrote:
>
> > Ian: I thought the point was to not keep the original commits in tact
> 100%,
> > but rather to squish and clean them, in a way that keeps attribution.
> >
> > I think Joe's question (and perhaps yours), is: is that okay to do?  A
> > separate question is: how to use the tools to make sure this is obvious.
> >
> > -Michal
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 9:52 PM, Ian Clelland <iclelland@chromium.org
> > >wrote:
> >
> > > If you're really concerned about keeping their commits intact, then you
> > can
> > > also do what I did with
> > > https://github.com/apache/cordova-plugin-file/pull/30 --
> > >
> > > I added her repo as a remote, and merged with --no-ff back into dev.
> That
> > > kept all of the original commits intact, any my name goes on the merge
> > > commit.
> > >
> > > (That may have also contributed to the pull request being marked as
> > > 'merged' automagically by GitHub)
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 8:56 PM, Andrew Grieve <agrieve@chromium.org>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Without  --signoff, you already get set as the "committer", while the
> > > > author is maintained. You can verify this by running "coho last-week"
> > and
> > > > see that it separates commits you wrote vs commits that you did from
> > pull
> > > > requests. That said, adding "--signoff" couldn't hurt.
> > > >
> > > > Squishing & fixing up does maintain authorship, so I think that's
> > fine. I
> > > > also sometime clean up whitespace & tabs->spaces.
> > > >
> > > > It's definitely nice to squash & fix the commit messages not just
for
> > > > release notes, but so you can figure out what the commit does from
> the
> > > "git
> > > > log", and so that they can be reverted easily.
> > > >
> > > > I've been doing this for several months now and haven't had anyone
> > > > complain, so I don't think those submitting the PRs care too much.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 5:51 PM, Michal Mocny <mmocny@chromium.org>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Does the squash keep original author info?  I know the hashes
> change
> > so
> > > > > they don't match up, but if we have the author and a reference to
> the
> > > PR
> > > > in
> > > > > the commit, I think thats fine for me.
> > > > >
> > > > > Alternative is to ask the contributor to do the squash, which we
do
> > try
> > > > to
> > > > > do, but its usually the non-responsive contributors that submit the
> > > nasty
> > > > > PR in the first place (go figure).
> > > > >
> > > > > -Michal
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 5:14 PM, Joe Bowser <bowserj@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hey
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I saw the wiki was updated, and I'm not quite sure how I feel
> about
> > > > this:
> > > > > > https://wiki.apache.org/cordova/ProcessingPullRequests
> > > > > >
> > > > > > # REPO_NAME example: "js"
> > > > > > # PULL_REQUEST_NUMBER example: "44"
> > > > > > curl
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/cordova-REPO_NAME/pull/PULL_REQUEST_NUMBER.patch
> > > > > > | git am
> > > > > > git rebase origin/master -i
> > > > > >
> > > > > > First, I'd add git am --signoff so that it adds your git e-mail
> to
> > > it.
> > > > > >  This just looks nice, but I'm not sure how I feel about doing
> the
> > > > > > commit squishing and pruning, since we want to have a nice audit
> > > trail
> > > > > > back to GitHub to see what we were doing.  I know it makes it
> > harder
> > > > > > to do release notes, but the one thing that I get super picky
> about
> > > is
> > > > > > who wrote what code, and it matching up.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Am I just being all Apache about this, and we could be way more
> > lax?
> > > > > > What are people's thoughts?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Joe
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message