Zsh Mailing List Archive
Messages sorted by:
Reverse Date,
Date,
Thread,
Author
Re: pull requests for completion functions
- X-seq: zsh-workers 42006
- From: Alex George <xzeroknightx@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: zsh-workers@xxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: pull requests for completion functions
- Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2017 22:14:13 +0000
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=Q35reEJeHzmpQKja0aDITXIxJ1x7epAozhFoFCn7D4A=; b=onRPf9KTzNqBbiaFGAb8TK+B9AzNHrXbQ7uo14SY9H0LuE/2aA1/BlPU9WfjzIKtJQ s5tCMkuswJVViP7w8N9UlDdS/5NMZ8kugL5Wy9pG86+RZJNwzV3RlyOaP0syR8jlghcG D01/fWeadUlbgj/Egz6JowkKseV0q0sl7AUr8G2GOkh/mBD3i3Pe7qUBy4YZZPITu0NP 8xjHzZ1LZ6XaUSRGuoQku4WmsBfAY3+NqFDG9RVSq6G6zLaCRcMUZQWkw2/BXhd9WTdT uCaolJpaIXVr0un9w6i5jOv4Z6DbRE+fyzS4bDVvRlYpt79I+tP0N7bFDhNkcoRAc/UH AKdg==
- In-reply-to: <016CE3D3-BAB1-41C8-A882-D3301F2D32F4@ntlworld.com>
- List-help: <mailto:zsh-workers-help@zsh.org>
- List-id: Zsh Workers List <zsh-workers.zsh.org>
- List-post: <mailto:zsh-workers@zsh.org>
- List-unsubscribe: <mailto:zsh-workers-unsubscribe@zsh.org>
- Mailing-list: contact zsh-workers-help@xxxxxxx; run by ezmlm
- References: <31167.1510244459@thecus.kiddle.eu> <016CE3D3-BAB1-41C8-A882-D3301F2D32F4@ntlworld.com>
No objections here. I think it would be especially useful for large
patches. However, if someone were to use git{hub,lab} to submit a PR,
should they send a message about it to the list? If so, should discussion
about the patch take place on the list, or on git{hub,lab}? What should the
mailing list subject be? Should the body simply contain a link to the PR?
These are just my immediate thoughts and questions about the approach.
Also, I'm terribly sorry if my formatting is poor, I'm a mailing list noon
and not using a "real" mail client.
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Peter Stephenson <p.w.stephenson@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, Nov 9, 2017, 09:33
Subject: Re: pull requests for completion functions
To: <zsh-workers@xxxxxxx>
(Aplogies for fornatting, on my mobile.)
I've certainly got no objection to more flexible arrangements for
completion functions if that works.
pws
On 9 November 2017 16:20:59 GMT+00:00, Oliver Kiddle <okiddle@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
>I have tentatively added a short line to the bottom of the contributing
>section of the web pages to indicate that completions are acceptable in
>the form of pull/merge requests. The link is here:
>
> http://zsh.sourceforge.net/Arc/git.html
>
>Can I take silence to mean that people were happy with my suggestion on
>this new policy? If not then please speak now, reverting the web page
>is
>easily done.
>
>My intended procedure for managing pull requests is as follows.
>
>First you need to add separate remote repositories:
> git remote add gitlab https://gitlab.com/zsh-org/zsh.git
> git remote add github https://github.com/zsh-users/zsh.git
>
>There's a variety of ways to fetch pull requests directly but I add a
>line
>in .git/config under each section:
>
> under: [remote "gitlab"]
>add: fetch =
>+refs/merge-requests/*/head:refs/remotes/gitlab/merge-requests/*
> under: [remote "github"]
> add: fetch = +refs/pull/*:refs/remotes/github/pr/*
>
>Many projects use merges but, to keep things as consistent as possible
>with current practices, for now I would cherry-pick individual pull
>requests and amend the commit to add a ChangeLog entry and reference
>to the commit message. For ChangeLog entries and commit messages, the
>references might be something like "MR: #1". Or do we need to be more
>explicit, e.g. "github PR: #1"?
>
>Any comments or suggestions would be welcome.
>
>Oliver
--
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
--
- Alex
Messages sorted by:
Reverse Date,
Date,
Thread,
Author