[IPython-dev] [Nipy-devel] git workflow and gitwash and what's next
Ariel Rokem
arokem at berkeley.edu
Mon Nov 1 17:22:25 EDT 2010
Hi everyone,
On Mon, Nov 1, 2010 at 10:17 AM, Matthew Brett <matthew.brett at gmail.com>wrote:
> Hi guys,
>
> Any interest in trying to harmonize / summarize recent git workflow
> discussions in gitwash? Or is it time to diverge in our gitwash
> versions?
>
> To summarize, I think everyone agrees with:
>
> http://mail.scipy.org/pipermail/ipython-dev/2010-October/006746.html
>
> More controversial is Fernando's 'always rebase' proposal:
>
> http://mail.scipy.org/pipermail/ipython-dev/2010-October/006748.html
>
> Then, Pauli extended and adapted the numpy gitwash workflow docs,
> partly as a result of the conversation on the numpy mailing list:
>
> http://docs.scipy.org/doc/numpy/dev/gitwash/development_workflow.html
>
>
This is very good! I sometimes wish there was a 'git undo' command, so I
particularly like this section:
http://docs.scipy.org/doc/numpy/dev/gitwash/development_workflow.html#rebasing-on-master
My recent experiences with rebasing have been quite painful and I wish I
always had a tmp branch to reset to, before I get myself into trouble.
People like me should not be allowed to follow Fernando's instructions about
rebasing, without having a tmp branch to go to, when they (that is, I) screw
up.
> I wonder whether it's worth a little pause for discussing where we all
> agree and differ in order for us all to benefit from the recent
> improvements by Fernando (mail) Pauli (edits)? It may also make it
> clearer whether there is still room to share a common set of gitwash
> docs, or whether it's time to diverge.
>
> Is there enough fundamental agreement on workflow? My feeling is that
> there is.
>
>
I agree with you that there is agreement :-)
Best,
Ariel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/ipython-dev/attachments/20101101/5c85daa1/attachment.html>
More information about the IPython-dev
mailing list