Works for me :-) This update will simplify things a lot because as soon as you create a branch from FogBugz issue, the Iceberg does following [1]: - fetches the pharo-project repository - checkouts to the particular commit from which the image was bootstrapped - creates a new branch
That means that: - you do not need to keep your fork up-to-date manually - things should be cleaner So as soon as your local repository is created as clone of your fork repository (your fork is origin), you do not need to set push and pull target nor synchronize your fork with pharo-project repository. Esteban will fix me if I'm wrong ;-) [1] see IcePharoCreateBranchFromIssue>>#createBranchNamed: -- Pavel 2017-12-14 13:19 GMT+01:00 Esteban Lorenzano <esteba...@gmail.com>: > Hi! > > I’m working on simplifying the contribution process, after collecting > opinions/experiences last couple of months. > As you know, Pharo contribution process is still WIP and we aim to have it > as smooth as possible for Pharo 7.0 release. Now, after observe the idea of > the “system repositories” was a bad idea because it introduced extra and > non standard “path” to contribution, I managed to remove that to > reestablish “the regular way”: you will now need to add pharo repository > just as any other repository you add, by cloning or adding local repository. > > I took Guille’s doc and moved it to pharo project (it does not has sense > to have it living in a contributor’s repository when is so important). You > can find it here: > > https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/wiki/Contribute-a-fix-to-Pharo > > This document is also updated to reveal this new process, please read it. > > How to update your startup scripts? > Some people has added startup scripts to easy the first part of > contribution. Instead enabling system repositories, etc. you now need to > replace that with this: > > (IceRepositoryCreator new > location: '/path/to/pharo-project/pharo' asFileReference; > subdirectory: 'src'; > createRepository) > register > > PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE… take a moment to read and try the document. Is > very important that document reflects new process and works reliable in > different scenarios (I validated it on macOS and Windows, and assumed it > worked fine on linux but you know… bad assumptions is the base of failure > ;) ) > > I’m eager to hear your feedback and continue enhancing the process. > > (yes, Stef, I know UI is still cumbersome… I’m working on that :) ) > > cheers! > Esteban >
