User talk:Dan-nl/Git and Gerrit/The Workflow

More workflow, more opinion needed

It's great that you're doing this, but it's too bare-bones and not opinionated enough to keep people out of trouble.

I wrote Git & gerrit day-to-day to remind myself of how to work with these tools. I think it's good but I'm not an expert.

The problem is we lack consensus on how best to work, so people like me just develop their own workflow. Then Git/Tutorial and Git/Workflow start diverging, and neither matches the git instructions used elsewhere like wikitech/How to deploy. We need a lot more policy by consistency so instead of n00bs learning a conflicting mish-mash from experts, they learn one approach that works (and experts remain free to do whatever). -- S Page (WMF) (talk) 03:05, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Missing ideas

These are all in Git & gerrit day-to-day, some need fleshing out. -- S Page (WMF) (talk) 03:05, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

name the remote "gerrit"

The ^%$$@! split between "gerrit" and "origin" means if you follow two sets of instructions you can wind up with two remotes that point to the same ^%$#! repository. Result: misery. saper wrote up how to fix this in Git/Workflow.

never, ever work on master

Always create a new branch for everything you work on. git checkout -b my/awesomefeature -t gerrit/master (Krinkle says have it track the remote master, thus the -t.)

always pull --ff-only master

The above means you can always grab master without messing up your code. Ensure this with git checkout master; git pull --ff-only.

Make detailed commits on local branch, then squash into another branch that you submit for review

It's a pain in the ass that gerrit makes you collapse crap into a single gerrit review, so do that separately. Otherwise your git commit --amend can screw up your local change, and you lose work. (I'm still figuring out how to do this.)

in reply

not sure how to reply to the talk page, so i’ll take this approach ...

1. the work i’ve done thus far is only a start.
2. i personally don’t understand the workflow that well yet, so as i have time and learn it i add it to what i’ve got here
3. the issue with origin/gerrit was a real hassle for me as well, but i think i finally understand it based on saper’s explanations and some help i got from the git-review team
4. i will look at your page as i move forward and see how i might be able to incorporate your ideas
5. i’m hoping to get a skeleton page structure in place and then ask others like yourself to add to it