From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 20349 invoked by alias); 19 Dec 2012 14:06:26 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@zsh.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes List-Id: Zsh Workers List List-Post: List-Help: X-Seq: 30918 Received: (qmail 21284 invoked from network); 19 Dec 2012 14:06:24 -0000 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on f.primenet.com.au X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED, DKIM_SIGNED,FREEMAIL_FROM,NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE, T_DKIM_INVALID,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL,UNPARSEABLE_RELAY autolearn=no version=3.3.2 Received-SPF: none (ns1.primenet.com.au: domain at yahoo.co.uk does not designate permitted sender hosts) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.co.uk; s=s1024; t=1355925978; bh=AE7tV2pO7/73DCA1fT5NpT9ndNiESi82yuO2Bs0Ojm4=; h=X-Yahoo-Newman-Id:X-Yahoo-Newman-Property:X-YMail-OSG:X-Yahoo-SMTP:Received:Received:In-reply-to:From:References:To:Subject:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-ID:Date:Message-ID; b=1sQbWfn8Kft//MHpCxZtQrdLiqjuTdiKGjIWvd+037YXMo8QKfTmlXNM44SoqJmpWUvlNzqPV7SH5cBLfo/hKdsjaSG8Zn1oV4KAMJCgdr37ypKOlvWMahmU/3P0t27IFhzdsnDOzsHQEhiCCH7KEA29Zr0De6kXORUpNWAhuU8= X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 68577.91445.bm@smtp129.mail.ukl.yahoo.com X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 X-YMail-OSG: HTYXXOgVM1mzEXQOo8ffbbc5tCd0qQ3KSrgZ4WzOZZUDcZ2 0kBOKS1D2lto1GO1KyFxnre82lrdlauULjENl74EP_26YyMzR1UJ1Gp8iz5O Wa31zHOamXth88cc5L7mxhNYj7kMJnGXQHKmcz1k7QjM_8WM17HglRN17ZX2 tY0FDkph621MFDJtB6Qn82EUqWN.biSo3RzbsknJ2b2VxN.euURwz_sYWZGQ ytYhIla0pdI83wALu6vDQsKCIwbu2kJRb6rURu87Dkz.JyBwQFFQy4sjGbxb Si1TNwOqseZN7371KVzDf5eMXsRKXFk1aciVZ2bhz3uRRjs4d9lKT5Putbw9 tYuA6Garrz2cy4KSsAbVK2c6CLZLHbH8tZMoQdyd_aVE7q0e_OputN3RK2VP lXTkkTdn_dIRp7QXJJ_L4AhE2NzUzvj8bo7beOuox X-Yahoo-SMTP: opAkk_CswBAce_kJ3nIPlH80cJI- In-reply-to: <20121218093618.GB11509@redoubt.spodhuis.org> From: Oliver Kiddle References: <20121217085215.GA87227@redoubt.spodhuis.org> <20121217101536.6825d808@pwslap01u.europe.root.pri> <20121217110035.GA89579@redoubt.spodhuis.org> <9514.1355752226@thecus.kiddle.eu> <20121218093618.GB11509@redoubt.spodhuis.org> To: zsh-workers@zsh.org Subject: Re: PATCH: document git in Etc/zsh-development-guide MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <18150.1355925702.1@thecus.kiddle.eu> Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2012 15:06:17 +0100 Message-ID: <18174.1355925977@thecus.kiddle.eu> Phil Pennock wrote: > Made more sense to me for the content to be in, so I committed as per > usual, so that instead of endless debate there's something solid in the > repo which can be patched if there's a need. On that basis, I've committed the change I had proposed too, excepting those parts that conflict with yours. Seems we need to revert some of that change, however, given that the patch archive does still exist. It'd also be nice not to leave the following question in the actual file: > + [Open Question: should the first 6 or so characters of the commit > + fingerprint be included, so: "* 12345/deadbeef: frobbed the baz" > ?] I think the answer to this is "no" given the chicken and egg problem of getting the correct hash into the commit log. Having the fingerprint of the change as posted to the mailing list also seems fairly useless as the only other place it would persist is in the mailing list archives and that can be referenced with the number. I also note the following as part of your steps: > + % git push origin feature_foo ... > + [ Cleanup: ] > + % git push origin :feature_foo The first command makes the feature branch available so perhaps someone might fetch that branch instead of using git am. It'd be more useful to document how to produce the patch to include in the mailing list message. Once you perform the cleanup, the patch remains in the repository but I don't know of a way it can be fetched. Furthermore, if sourceforge run git gc, it'll be deleted by the garbage collection. Is there a point to these two steps that I've missed? Note: if the cleanup step remains, it might be good to include an extra comment on it - using git push with the source ref empty to delete a remote branch is not the most obvious of commands to someone new to git. Oliver