I would recommend https://github.com/glandium/git-cinnabar/wiki/Mozilla:-A-git-workflow-for-Gecko-development.
The other places should probably be updated to point at that. -Jeff On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 12:57 PM, Ethan Glasser-Camp <eglasserc...@mozilla.com> wrote: > Sorry if this is a bit off-topic. It seems from these threads that there is > a more-or-less canonical way to use git to hack on Firefox. Where can I > find out more about it? > > Looking online, the only information I could find was at > https://github.com/glandium/git-cinnabar/wiki/Mozilla:-A-git-workflow-for-Gecko-development. > Is that the best source of information? I didn't see anything under > https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Mozilla/Developer_guide, > http://mozilla-version-control-tools.readthedocs.io/en/latest/, or > https://firefox-source-docs.mozilla.org/. > > Thanks! > > Ethan > > > On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 10:05 AM, Kartikaya Gupta <kgu...@mozilla.com> > wrote: > >> This message was inspired by the `mach try` thread but is off-topic >> there so I think deserves its own thread. >> >> It seems to me that a lot of people are now assuming a cinnabar repo >> is the canonical way for git users to develop on mozilla-central. If >> we want to make this mozilla policy I don't really have objections, >> but I think that if we do that, we should maintain a canonical git >> repo that is built using cinnabar, rather than having everybody have >> their own "grafted" version of a cinnabar repo. The problem with the >> latter approach is that different people will have different SHAs for >> the same upstream commit, thus making it much harder to share repos. >> >> I've tried using cinnabar a couple of times now and the last time I >> tried, this was the dealbreaker for me. My worfklow often involves >> moving a branch from one machine to another and the extra hassle that >> results from mismatched SHAs makes it much more complicated than it >> needs to be. gecko-dev doesn't have this problem as it has a canonical >> upstream that works much more like a regular git user expects. >> >> As an aside, I also think that the cinnabar workflow as it exists now >> actually demotes git to more of a "second-class citizen". >> Conceptually, if you're using gecko-dev, everything works exactly as a >> git user would expect, and only when you need to push to official >> mozilla hg repos do you need to overcome the vcs translation hurdle >> (which things like moz-git-tools help with). However if you use >> cinnabar the vcs translation is more woven into your everyday git >> commands (e.g. git pull) and you need to be more consciously aware of >> it. This makes it harder to use whatever your normal git workflow is, >> which is why I claim it demotes git to second-class. It would be great >> if we could come up with a way to avoid this but honestly since I >> haven't used a cinnabar workflow for any significant period of time I >> haven't given much thought as to how to go about doing this. >> >> Discussion welcome! >> >> Cheers, >> kats >> _______________________________________________ >> dev-platform mailing list >> dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org >> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform >> > _______________________________________________ > dev-platform mailing list > dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org > https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform _______________________________________________ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
