On Tue, Apr 09, 2013 at 12:30:49PM +0100, Florian Rathgeber wrote: > On 08/04/13 22:13, Anders Logg wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 08, 2013 at 07:14:51PM +0100, Florian Rathgeber wrote: > >> On 08/04/13 18:14, Anders Logg wrote: > >>> On Mon, Apr 08, 2013 at 05:44:19PM +0100, Florian Rathgeber wrote: > >>>> On 08/04/13 11:40, Florian Rathgeber wrote: > >>>>> On 08/04/13 08:46, Anders Logg wrote: > >>>>>> The conversion to git is now complete. (Thanks again to Florian > >>>>>> for helping us out with the scripting!) Here are some initial > >>>>>> instructions for how to access the new code. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> - The new repositories can be found here: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> https://bitbucket.org/fenics-project > >>>>>> > >>>>>> - The repositories (here DOLFIN) can be cloned by: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> git clone https://bitbucket.org/fenics-project/dolfin.git > >>>>>> > >>>>>> - Developers with write access should use: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> git clone [email protected]:fenics-project/dolfin.git > >>>>> > >>>>> There's no harm always cloning via SSH. > >>>>> > >>>>>> - A full 1.2 GB archive of all the repositories, before and after > >>>>>> conversion, before and after filtering, including all feature > >>>>>> branches hosted on Launchpad can be downloaded from here: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> http://fenicsproject.org/pub/archive/ > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Developers of feature branches should be able to clone their > >>>>>> feature branches in git from the above address, push to bitbucket, > >>>>>> and make pull requests. > >>>>> > >>>>> To be clear: We have migrated all feature branches for all FEniCS > >>>>> projects as they were on launchpad on Friday afternoon. So if your > >>>>> branch was up-to-date on launchpad you don't need to do any conversion > >>>>> yourself (in fact you shouldn't). > >>>>> > >>>>> A DOLFIN branch lp:~user/dolfin/mybranch has been converted to the git > >>>>> branch user/mybranch (similar for the other projects i.e. the project > >>>>> name has been left out). > >>>>> > >>>>> To get your branch (again assuming DOLFIN), do the following: > >>>>> > >>>>> # clone DOLFIN (only contains the master branch, formerly trunk) > >>>>> $ git clone [email protected]:fenics-project/dolfin.git > >>>>> $ cd dolfin > >>>>> > >>>>> # Add a git remote called archive and select only your specific branch > >>>>> $ git remote add -t user/mybranch archive > >>>>> http://fenicsproject.org/pub/archive/fenics-bzr-to-git-conversion-2013/repositories/git/dolfin.filtered.git > >>>>> $ git fetch archive > >>>>> > >>>>> # List local and remote branches > >>>>> $ git branch -av > >>>>> > >>>>> # Look at the history graph and check your branch's ancestry is correct > >>>>> $ git log --graph --oneline --annotate --decorate --all > >>>>> > >>>>> # If everything is fine, check out your branch and profit! > >>>>> $ git checkout user/mybranch > >>>>> > >>>>> If you want to pull down multiple branches or don't remember your > >>>>> branch names you can also fetch all branches by omitting the -t > >>>>> argument when adding the git remote. You can then list all branch > >>>>> names and pick the ones you want to continue working on. > >>>>> > >>>>> For other projects, replace dolfin by the project name (but see the > >>>>> notice below). All repositories are archived at > >>>>> http://fenicsproject.org/pub/archive/fenics-bzr-to-git-conversion-2013/repositories/git/ > >>>>> > >>>>> IMPORTANT: We rewrote the history and stripped files for DOLFIN, FFC > >>>>> and UFC, which is why you *have to* use {dolfin,ffc,ufc}.filtered.git > >>>>> but {dorsal,ferari,fiat,instant,ufl}.git. Please be very careful not > >>>>> to accidentally import the non-filtered history of those 3 projects! > >>>>> > >>>>> Florian > >>>>> > >>>>>> - A very good resource for how to use git can be found here: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> http://git-scm.com/book > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I suggest everyone reads it carefully, at least the first three > >>>>>> chapters, but here's a very quick git introduction: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> 1. Same as hg/bzr with: git add, rm, commit, clone, push, pull, > >>>>>> status > >>>>>> > >>>>>> 2. Files need to be staged before commit: git add foo, or use > >>>>>> commit -a. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> 3. The whole bzr mess of needing to merge in a separate directory > >>>>>> is gone. Just pull (or fetch + merge), commit, push as with hg. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> 4. Branches are very light-weight and in-directory, as opposed to > >>>>>> bzr with one-directory-per-branch. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> - Work in progress: new mailing list, moving questions to > >>>>>> stackexchange, closing down Launchpad pages, moving issues, > >>>>>> downloading copies of tarballs from Launchpad and archive on web > >>>>>> page. Please comment and contribute. > > The imho most important step before people can start actually working > with git is pointing the buildbots to the new repositories and getting > them green. I just tried merging the git master into our FFC branch but > realised it's completely pointless right now since master is > comprehensively broken.
In what way? The references are missing but otherwise it seems to work fine. > >>>> Now is the time to discuss worflows to use with the new repositories. > >>>> There is the opportunity to keep more than the master branch active in > >>>> the "canonical" repository. A popular workflow is called gitflow [1] and > >>>> there is a command line tool extending git for working with it [2]. > >>>> > >>>> Everyone without push access to the canonical repositories will have to > >>>> work in their own forks and make pull requests upstream. The core > >>>> developers can decide on a policy on which branches are to be kept in > >>>> the canonical repositories vs. personal forks. > >>>> > >>>> [1]: http://nvie.com/posts/a-successful-git-branching-model/ > >>>> [2]: https://github.com/nvie/gitflow > >>> > >>> The model described in [1] with 'dev' and 'master' branches in the > >>> canonical repository looks like an attractive model. > >>> > >>> Is [1] the same as [2]? > >> > >> Yes, [2] is only a set of git extensions to simplify working with [1]. > > > > I read [1] again. I really like this development model. I don't view > > it as heavyweight at all. It seems to make the development process > > easy and smooth, for example being able to quickly fix bugs in > > development releases without stalling development in the 'develop' > > branch or in feature branches. > > > > Another good thing is that someone obviously thought this through and > > others are using it (to the point that special tools, documentation > > and graphics have been created to support it, which means we don't > > need to invent our own). > > > > I think we should adopt this model. > > Agreed, I think it's a proven and well documented model. However (as any > other workflow) it requires a level of discipline among the core > developers and everyone needs to adopt it. Yes. > For external contributions it's easy to enforce: only allow pull > requests against the dev branch (or a realease or hotfix branch if > applicable). ok. -- Anders _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~fenics Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~fenics More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
