From kde-core-devel Thu Jan 20 21:14:44 2011 From: Ben Cooksley Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 21:14:44 +0000 To: kde-core-devel Subject: Re: KDE git docs for dummies ? WAS: Re: splitting up kdebase in git Message-Id: X-MARC-Message: https://marc.info/?l=kde-core-devel&m=129555814107349 2011/1/21 Alexander Neundorf : > On Thursday 20 January 2011, Aaron J. Seigo wrote: >> On Wednesday, January 19, 2011, Alexander Neundorf wrote: >> > http://community.kde.org/Sysadmin/GitKdeOrgManual looks quite ok for >> > somebody who knows how to use git for KDE, but not for me. >> > Can somebody please add a simple step-by-step howto, what I have to do >> > with identity.kde.org, projects.kde.org and git.kde.org, how the git >> > push/merge/branching policy is for KDE, etc. If there are existing blog >> >> this is, at least to me, two related but separate topics: >> >> a) how do i get myself hooked up with all the tools? >> b) what is the development workflow once i have those tools? > > Yes. > And anybody who wants to commit needs to get both more or less right right > from the start. > >> as i understand it: >> >> identity.k.o, projects.k.o, reviewboard.k.o, etc. are things you set up >> once and mostly forget about afterwards. they are the new replacements to >> the "how do i get an svn account?", "how do get a new svn module?" and >> "what is the lifecycle of a kde app?" >> >> this is mostly about re-working existing documentation, such as: >> >>       http://techbase.kde.org/Policies/SVN_Guidelines >> >> and it's probably a really good opportunity to try and put it into an order >> that's even more accessible than what we have right now. a "KDE >> contributor's primer" on techbase, which is what you seem to be looking for >> (and something i'd find useful myself as i learn all the new answers, too >> :) >> >> one thing that complicates this is that these tools are to some extent >> still in development. as needs are discovered and defined, sysadmin is >> adding capabilities to cover them. the recent addition of >> http://projects.kde.org/kde_projects.xml is a good example. so the "it's >> not finished yet, but it's already usable" status does mean it's a little >> more tricky. >> >> the other half of the question is development workflow. and that's even >> less well defined, as Ian noted. it would be very good, as Ossi noted, to >> have something that can create some consistency between KDE projects. >> personally, i think we'll end up with something like this: >> >>       http://techbase.kde.org/Policies/Kdelibs_Coding_Style >> >> but for git workflow in kdelibs. hopefully then we can encourage as many of >> KDE projects to adopt it outright or as the core of their own workflow. >> kdelibs just hasn't had this done for it yet. it's part of the struggle >> with kdelibs given how distributed and loosely knit the group of people who >> work kdelibs are. >> >> in kde-workspace (and for the parts of kde-runtime we also maintain) we've >> been discussing how to do things. i love that you shared what CMake has >> done here as it's a great reference point. thanks for that :) so far, the >> workflow we've sketched together looks a -lot- like this: >> >>       http://public.kitware.com/Wiki/Git/Workflow/Topic >> >> i'm fairly tempted to just steal .. er .. borrow, yeah, that's it .. >> borrow! that from cmake for our needs. > > Would be perfectly fine :-) > As long as there is no policy defined, I simply try to push/merge to the > respective master ? > I also think that really most/all new KDE git repositories should use a common > workflow. > >> perhaps we could even use it as a >> starting point for the kdelibs workflow as well. >> >> one of the things we haven't worked out yet is how to publish the status of >> topic/feature branches, which is what this seems to address for CMake: >> >>       http://public.kitware.com/Wiki/Git/Workflow/Stage >> >> ? > > The git stage for cmake is a set of scripts written by Brad. Not sure it's > intended to be a long term solution. > They are thinking about using something else instead ... it has git in the > name and is a google project.. web thingy... was it gerrit ? Not sure. Correct, it is Gerrit which is a more git based alternative to Reviewboard. http://code.google.com/p/gerrit/ > > Alex > Regards, Ben