Re: About our GSoC projects
От | Guillaume Lelarge |
---|---|
Тема | Re: About our GSoC projects |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 4C6B0A9E.5010405@lelarge.info обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: About our GSoC projects (Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>) |
Ответы |
Re: About our GSoC projects
(Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>)
|
Список | pgadmin-hackers |
Le 17/08/2010 16:08, Magnus Hagander a écrit : > On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 12:15 PM, Guillaume Lelarge > <guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote: >>>> So, my basic question is: how do we handle this? >>>> >>>> I know Luis is interested to continue to work on his project. I don't >>>> know for Adeel. Anyway, perhaps a good way to do this is to create two >>>> dev branches on the pgadmin repo, one for each GSoC project. But I >>>> wonder what we should do with the branches once they'll get merged on >>>> the master branch. >>> >>> That doesn't help unless we give them both commit access, which isn't >>> going to happen on the master repo. Ashesh is much higher up in the >>> queue for that :-) >>> >> >> OK. >> >>> I would suggest that they both create repos on github (or one of us >>> does, and gives them access). >>> >> >> I can probably do that. I can create two repos, one for each project, on >> my github account, apply the respective patch, and give them access to >> it and to anyone else who wants to work on this. Adeel had trouble >> working with git on Windows, and I wasn't able to help him on that. >> Though I need to do it myself, so I should be able to help him next time. >> >> Magnus, care to share your thoughts on this? you're much more >> experienced with git than me :) > > That's not the way to use github. > > The proper way, if we want people to use github (fwiw, I think that's > a good idea), is to create an authoritative mirror there, like we've > done for PostgreSQL. IIf I understand you correctly, the git server on pgadmin.org will still be the official one, and there will be a mirror on github. > This could be done under the same account as > postgres (which needs to be converted to a group, but that's a > different thing), or a separate one for pgadmin. The users in question > then create their own personal github accounts, and forks the pgadmin > repository in there. Then they apply their patches to that, and keep > working off that. > And, if they want to, they can add some of us as contributors to their patches. I'm still thinkg about my GSoC "issue". IOW, if I take Luis's project as an example, he should fork the github pgadmin repo, apply his patch, commit, push it. Then he could add me as a contributor. We work together to make it commitable, and at last I merge his repository into the git on pgadmin.org to commit it? Did I get something wrong? > Github provides the tools you need to merge this back into mainline, > if/when this is required. Until that is done, it's up to them to > regularly merge with upstream - which git makes really easy. > With "git merge", right? > If we want to go this way, I'll be happy to set up the github > mirroring required for the main repository. > If I understood correctly, yeah, I would like that to happen. The sooner, the better. I don't really know if we should use the same account or a different one. I actually don't care. > WRT git for windows - it works pretty well, except some things break > on 64-bit windows (due to mingw/msys not working properly there). But > that's a matter of doing "git fetch ; git merge" instead of "git > pull". I'm told this is fixed in newer versions, but I haven't tried > that myself. > OK. I need to do that on my windows PC. -- Guillaume http://www.postgresql.fr http://dalibo.com
В списке pgadmin-hackers по дате отправления:
Предыдущее
От: "pgAdmin Trac"Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [pgAdmin III] #220: Show/hide columns in frmStatus's reports