[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: github and its workflows (was Re: manpages.debian.org has been modernized!)

On 30 January 2017 at 12:53, The Wanderer <wanderer@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> On 2017-01-30 at 07:38, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
>> On 01/30/2017 01:32 PM, The Wanderer wrote:
>>> If someone isn't cloning the repository locally, how is that
>>> someone creating the patch which is in the git repo which is
>>> requested to be pulled?
>> Choose a random file in a random repository you are not allowed to
>> commit to. Click on the edit button. Ack that github will create a
>> fork to edit the file. Make your changes. Click on save and on create
>> a pull request... just a few clicks...
> ...bwah?
> I deleted my "unless github has incorporated an _editor interface_ now"
> comment, because I thought that was too tangential and off-the-wall to
> bring up even as a hypothetical.
> Are you saying that people are writing and submitting patches via a
> Web-based editor interface, and that you're recommending that people
> consider _accepting_ those patches, when they haven't even been
> _build-tested_ before submission (because you can't build-test - much
> less actually _test_ - without the full source tree, which you'd obtain
> by pulling the repo)?
> Maybe I'm missing something, or maybe I'm just backwards, but that
> sounds _insane_ to me.

Well, clearly, one should have CI hooked up to run the tests against
merge proposals and master branch. And pretend that is good enough.

In practice, works fine for small edits, e.g. typos and grammar corrections.

> (I imagine it would be _possible_ to have a workflow of something like
> "clone the repo, edit and test locally, copy-and-paste the full contents
> of the edited source files one-by-one into the editor interface", just
> to avoid 'git push' - but that seems like overkill, and would still
> involve cloning the repo.)
> If github really is encouraging that sort of thing (by including such an
> editor interface) - as well as the "keep the only copy of your fork in
> the same centralized location as the original code" mindset implied by a
> don't-bother-to-clone-a-local-copy workflow - that leaves me
> considerably less comfortable with the idea of people using github than
> I used to be.
> --
>    The Wanderer
> The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one
> persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all
> progress depends on the unreasonable man.         -- George Bernard Shaw



Reply to: