Re: About our GSoC projects

On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 00:18, Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume(at)lelarge(dot)info> wrote:
> Le 17/08/2010 16:08, Magnus Hagander a écrit :
>> On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 12:15 PM, Guillaume Lelarge
>> <guillaume(at)lelarge(dot)info> wrote:
>>> 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.

Correct, that was my thought.

>> 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

Yes, but that's again not the way you're "supposed" to work. But it
may be a good compromise.

You are supposed to work by having one "his branch" on his repo and
one "gleus branch" on your repo. Then you merge with his, and if you
make changes, he merges with yours, back and forth until you agree on
something that's good. At that point, you merge this (with squash,
please :P) into the main repository and push that.

> 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?

That is one way to do it as well, yes, but it's not really the "git
way". That said, we may not necessarily *want* the git way, but we
should know what it is.

>> 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?
>

Correct. Or to be more specific, you use "git remote" to add his
repository, then when you want to merge you do "git fetch" on his
repository and then "git merge" to put it on your branch.

>> 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.

Dave, any comment on that?

--
 Magnus Hagander
 Me: http://www.hagander.net/
 Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/