Re: push-access

[David Kastrup]

"Phil Holmes" <address@hidden> writes:

> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Thomas Morley" <address@hidden>
> To: "Graham Percival" <address@hidden>
> Cc: "lilypond-devel" <address@hidden>
> Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2013 1:32 PM
> Subject: Re: push-access
>
>
>> 2013/8/27 Graham Percival <address@hidden>:
>>> On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 01:36:24PM +0200, Thomas Morley wrote:
>>>> To be sure: am I right that it will succeed only _after_ Graham
>>>> granted membership?
>>>
>>> Approved now.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> - Graham
>>
>> Thanks!
>> Afaics, all works and I've push-access.
>>
>> Next step: I'll reread CG _how_ to push.
>> :)
>>
>
> FWIW; I don't quite follow the CG's steps in pushing to staging,
> because I don't often use branches to keep my changes, I use patches.

That usually makes things a lot harder when patches don't apply any more
or other problems occur.

> Based on David's advice a long time ago, this is my sequence:
>
> git pull

I'm not fond of "git pull" as it tends to merge things (unless you make
very sure never to commit anything to master, in which case you don't
even _need_ a local master but can check out origin instead).  I usually
just use "git fetch".

> git checkout origin/staging
> git am 0001-MyPatch.patch
> gitk
> git push origin HEAD:staging
> git checkout master

I don't think it makes much sense recommending a workflow different from
the CG unless specifically asked for.  We don't put stuff in the CG in
order to complicate matters, so that's usually the best bet.

-- 
David Kastrup