[rspec-users] rspec at github

Pat Maddox pergesu at gmail.com
Wed Apr 9 21:54:59 EDT 2008

On Wed, Apr 9, 2008 at 4:04 PM, Wincent Colaiuta <win at wincent.com> wrote:
> El 9/4/2008, a las 20:15, "David Chelimsky" <dchelimsky at gmail.com>
>  escribió:
> >
>  > It's official: http://tinyurl.com/5npxxb
>  >
>  > Git some happiness!
>  >
>  > Cheers,
>  > David
>  One thing, on the wiki you say:
>  > The easiest way to create a clean history is to make a new branch
>  > that tracks RSpec's master branch, and then cherry-pick your own
>  > commits to it. For example, say you had a commit whose sha is abc123
>  > that you'd like to contribute to RSpec. However you made a previous
>  > commit to your repo that would be irrelevant, but that would get
>  > pulled in when we pull from your repo.
>  Although it _may_ be the "easiest" way, I think there are better ways
>  which should probably be mentioned for any patch series which has more
>  than one commit in it (and breaking changes up into logical steps
>  certainly makes reviewing changes much easier). So I think you should
>  probably also mention the utility of topic branches and using "git
>  rebase" to keep them up-to-date eg:
>    # make sure we have the latest changes
>    git fetch
>    # create a new topic branch
>    git checkout -b my_topic origin/master
>    # hack, hack, hack, committing along the way
>    ...
>    # make sure we have the latest changes
>    git fetch
>    # prepare branch for submission
>    git rebase --interactive
>    # make a patch series for attachment to a lighthouse ticket
>    git format-patch
>  That's the basic idea. There are some shortcuts that can be taken (for
>  example, if you are already on your master branch and it is set up to
>  track the remote origin -- and it will be if you did a standard "git
>  clone" of the RSpec repo -- then you can just do "git checkout -b
>  my_topic", preceded by a "git pull" if you want to pull down and merge
>  in the latest changes from the remote).
>  "git rebase --interactive" is a really amazing tool that you just have
>  to try out. It allows you to:
>  1. "rebase" the commits so that they always appear to be "on top" of
>  the HEAD of the master branch, instead of several commits back; this
>  makes the history cleaner because things look like linear development
>  (technically a "fast-forward" merge) rather than a merge - this
>  rebasing happens automatically when you run "git rebase"
>  2. skip commits; for those times when you realize that a change
>  doesn't really belong in a particular series
>  3. "squash" multiple commits into one - perhaps you got a bit commit-
>  happy and there are multiple changes that should logically be grouped
>  into a single commit
>  4. edit or amend commits; either just tweaking the commit messages or
>  actually changing the contents of the commit (for example, you can
>  split a commit into a series of commits, or you can add completely new
>  content to a commit)
>  5. reorder commits: it's amazing how easily this is done (just by
>  reordering the commits in a list), and it can allow you to put a
>  series into a more logical order that will be more easily reviewed
>  In short it is an incredibly powerful tool, and you simply must try it
>  in order to see how amazingly easy it is to do all this stuff which
>  you would never dream of doing with Subversion... Go and try it now,
>  really!
>  And best of all, it leads to better code and a better RSpec, because
>  the more reviewable your code is, the higher the quality of the stuff
>  that ends up getting integrated.

Thanks for that.  I wrote what's up on the wiki... and to be perfectly
honest, I only care about the end goal of having clean histories to
merge into RSpec core.  I also don't fully understand everything you
wrote.  If you had some time, perhaps you could take the existing
content, add some concrete examples of your techniques, and extract
all of that to a new page.  I would certainly be very grateful :)


More information about the rspec-users mailing list