On Dec 6, 2011, at 9:54 AM, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > On 2011-12-05 20:06, Nicolas Montgermont wrote: >> Hello Iohannes / list, >> >> I've worked on a few help files. It was mainly help files that were not >> in the Gem format. >> I've done that using git. >> >> You can find them here: >> [email protected]:nixhol/Gem.git >> the name of the branch is: >> help-files >> >> I've cloned the Gem sourceforge repository, then i've created a branch, >> worked on the files, and then i've pushed my modifs on my github >> repository. >> Is this the good workflow for contributing to Gem using git? or do you >> prefer another way? > > yes, i think this is the best way to contribute to Gem. > i incorporated your fixes and pushed to sourceforge. > > i'm not yet sure whether it is best to _merge_ your branch into master > or to _rebase_ it onto master. > for know i prefer a rebase (if possible), but if that makes problems for > somebody i could do merges as well.
IMHO, if the model is IOhannes as sole committer to the Gem git, and people doing work on their own git forks, then I think that rebasing is the best option. The Linux-style flow here is that the git forks should rebase to be on the HEAD of the main git before submitting the changes. .hc ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- All mankind is of one author, and is one volume; when one man dies, one chapter is not torn out of the book, but translated into a better language; and every chapter must be so translated.... -John Donne _______________________________________________ GEM-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/gem-dev
