lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mikhail Khludnev <mkhlud...@griddynamics.com>
Subject Re: The Old Git Discussion
Date Sat, 04 Jan 2014 08:28:10 GMT
Robert,

Can you check my fork?

$ git clone git@github.com:mkhludnev/bogus.git
Cloning into 'bogus'...
remote: Counting objects: 5, done.
remote: Compressing objects: 100% (2/2), done.
remote: Total 5 (delta 1), reused 5 (delta 1)
Receiving objects: 100% (5/5), done.
Resolving deltas: 100% (1/1), done.
$ cd bogus/
$ git branch -alv
* master                     1463733 blahblah
  remotes/origin/HEAD        -> origin/master
  remotes/origin/feature     1463733 blahblah
  remotes/origin/featureCool 9f54f3b whatever
  remotes/origin/master      1463733 blahblah

^^ see, I delayed featureCool one commit

$ git checkout featureCool
Branch featureCool set up to *track remote branch featureCool from origin.*
Switched to a new branch 'featureCool'

$ git merge master
Updating 9f54f3b..1463733
Fast-forward
 0 files changed
 create mode 100644 bar

$ git status
# On branch featureCool
# *Your branch is ahead of *'origin/featureCool' by 1 commit.
#
nothing to commit (working directory clean)

^^^^ you see. If someone properly specifies -u while pushes a branch, it
warns about "local changes" - 'Your branch is ahead of' about 'local
changes'.

I mean, technically there is no problem to provide toolset, which enforces
a necessary workflow like https://twitter.com/sstephenson/status/1023295427or
https://github.com/webmat/git_remote_branch.



On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 7:13 AM, Robert Muir <rcmuir@gmail.com> wrote:

> It happens with 1.8 too. I'm not really concerned what the technical
> explanation is (i'm sure someone will say: you are holding it wrong).
>
> one of the most important things about version control is being able
> to track changes. if 'status' tells me my working directory is clean,
> but then 'push' does something, that tells me its not ready for prime
> time :)
>
> step 1: make a commit to branch A
>
> rmuir@beast:~/bogus$ git checkout master
> Switched to branch 'master'
> rmuir@beast:~/bogus$ ls
> foo
> rmuir@beast:~/bogus$ touch bar
> rmuir@beast:~/bogus$ git add bar
> rmuir@beast:~/bogus$ git commit -m "blahblah"
> [master 1463733] blahblah
>  1 file changed, 0 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>  create mode 100644 bar
> rmuir@beast:~/bogus$ git push origin master
> Counting objects: 3, done.
> Delta compression using up to 8 threads.
> Compressing objects: 100% (2/2), done.
> Writing objects: 100% (2/2), 241 bytes | 0 bytes/s, done.
> Total 2 (delta 0), reused 0 (delta 0)
> To git@github.com:rmuir/bogus.git
>    9f54f3b..1463733  master -> master
>
>
> step 2: merge to branch B
> rmuir@beast:~/bogus$ git checkout feature
> Switched to branch 'feature'
> rmuir@beast:~/bogus$ git merge master
> Updating 9f54f3b..1463733
> Fast-forward
>  bar | 0
>  1 file changed, 0 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>  create mode 100644 bar
> rmuir@beast:~/bogus$ git status
> # On branch feature
> nothing to commit, working directory clean
>
> ^^^^^^^ see that shit? it says the words 'working directory clean' but it
> lies.
>
> rmuir@beast:~/bogus$ git push origin feature
> Total 0 (delta 0), reused 0 (delta 0)
> To git@github.com:rmuir/bogus.git
>    9f54f3b..1463733  feature -> feature
> rmuir@beast:~/bogus$ git --version
> git version 1.8.3.2
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 9:09 PM, Benson Margulies <bimargulies@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 7:22 PM, Robert Muir <rcmuir@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> is 1.7.10.2 considered old? It still happens to me with that. I use
> >> git at work every day.
> >
> > i honestly wouldn't have called that ancient, but I can't recall when
> > I used a version before 1.8.
> >
> > i have no quick answer to the phenomenon that afflicts you. Feel free
> > to ping me off-list on the off chance that I can think of something
> > useful by asking you 20 questions that the rest of this list doesn't
> > want to read.
> >
> >>
> >> I think there are two reasons why i see this:
> >> 1) I always like to run 'svn status' (actually followed by svn diff,
> >> too), before committing as a final review to make sure i'm changing
> >> what i'm thinking i'm changing. I must be able to do this with git
> >> too.
> >>
> >> 2) After a merge, I like to run tests to ensure I won't actually break
> >> things. I do this with svn too (e.g. run all tests after merge
> >> --reintegrate). Tests can take some time. The phone might ring, i
> >> might have to walk the dog, i might go get a beer. When i come back,
> >> god forbid I run step 1 again to see what my current state is, or
> >> re-run tests too.
> >>
> >>
> >> On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 7:04 PM, Benson Margulies <bimargulies@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>> I've never seen anything like this with any modern version of git. We
> >>> use it at work, we have many branches.
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 6:46 PM, Robert Muir <rcmuir@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>> My final biggest complaint with git is the bugginess of 'git status'.
> After
> >>>> operations like merging (which can get complex), it will lie to you
> and tell
> >>>> you your checkout is clean, when in fact its not: if you then type
> git push
> >>>> it will push lots of commits. This is a real problem if you work on
> many
> >>>> repositories, it means you must fall back to using patches and such
> >>>> anyway... Aka... Git does not really work
> >>>>
> >>>> On Jan 2, 2014 3:52 PM, "Mark Miller" <markrmiller@gmail.com>
wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> bzr is dying; Emacs needs to move
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2014-01/msg00005.html
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Interesting thread.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> For similar reasons, I think that Lucene and Solr should eventually
> move
> >>>>> to Git. It's not GitHub, but it's a lot closer. The new Apache
> projects I
> >>>>> see are all choosing Git. It's the winners road I think. I don't
> know that
> >>>>> there is a big hurry right now, but I think it's inevitable that
we
> should
> >>>>> switch.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> --
> >>>>> - Mark
> >>>
> >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
> >>>
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
> >>
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>
>


-- 
Sincerely yours
Mikhail Khludnev
Principal Engineer,
Grid Dynamics

<http://www.griddynamics.com>
 <mkhludnev@griddynamics.com>

Mime
View raw message