- From: David Dorwin <ddorwin@google.com>
- Date: Thu, 12 May 2016 18:15:18 -0700
- To: Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org>
- Cc: "Jerry Smith (IEP)" <jdsmith@microsoft.com>, Mark Watson <watsonm@netflix.com>, Matt Wolenetz <wolenetz@google.com>, "public-html-media@w3.org" <public-html-media@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAHD2rsgHV_a5jC7KrH_XtFxd+SBhgmsXDNq0ZM2URfdu+SSpBw@mail.gmail.com>
We only use `gh-pages` as "trunk". We commit both the `-respec.html` and generated files there. The `master` branch was deleted soon after we switched to GitHub. The generated pages might be a source of conflict, but I think there is some uncertainty related to just the source files. On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 5:50 PM, Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org> wrote: > > > On 05/12/2016 05:25 PM, Jerry Smith (IEP) wrote: > >> We all create a branch for each PR so that subsequent commits are >> isolated to the issue they are working. >> > > Yes, of course. > > Is it okay to rebase in these (git rebase gh-pages)? >> > > Not sure what you mean here. In my proposal, the history of commits is > maintained on the master branch and the gh-pages branch only contains the > automatically generated draft, so no need to rebase anything there. > > Having said that, such change at the moment could be disruptive to you > folks so I'd rather not touch the branches until you folks want me to > squash btw. Just give me the word and I'll do it. > > Philippe > > > > Jerry >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Philippe Le Hegaret [mailto:plh@w3.org] >> Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2016 5:11 PM >> To: Jerry Smith (IEP) <jdsmith@microsoft.com>; Mark Watson < >> watsonm@netflix.com>; David Dorwin <ddorwin@google.com> >> Cc: Matt Wolenetz <wolenetz@google.com>; public-html-media@w3.org >> Subject: Re: Using GitHub's merge button >> >> >> Ideally, here what I think the editors could use: >> >> - use a master branch for the respec version of the version and edits and >> PRs go against that branch. >> - set the master branch to have the web UI use squash instead of merge >> - use the gh-page branch to have the draft automatically generated into >> everytime there is a commit or a merge into the master branch. >> >> You avoid merge conflict on the generated draft like that. >> >> Philippe >> >> On 05/12/2016 05:05 PM, Jerry Smith (IEP) wrote: >> >>> Is our working guidance to avoid rebasing in the branch where the Pull >>> Request originates? I know the merge flow creates a branch for this, >>> but have also had folks advise me to periodically rebase to stay on >>> top of merge conflicts. >>> >>> The modified flow from Mark below seems much like our current manual >>> process, right? >>> >>> Jerry >>> >>> *From:*Mark Watson [mailto:watsonm@netflix.com] >>> *Sent:* Thursday, May 12, 2016 10:29 AM >>> *To:* David Dorwin <ddorwin@google.com> >>> *Cc:* Jerry Smith (IEP) <jdsmith@microsoft.com>; Matt Wolenetz >>> <wolenetz@google.com>; public-html-media@w3.org; Philippe Le Hégaret >>> <plh@w3.org> >>> *Subject:* Re: Using GitHub's merge button >>> >>> On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 10:13 AM, David Dorwin <ddorwin@google.com >>> <mailto:ddorwin@google.com>> wrote: >>> >>> Currently, our process [1] is to manually squash and commit pull >>> requests. This was discussed in the thread ending in [2] >>> >>> As mentioned in the review of EME #165, it appears GitHub now >>> supports squashing via the big green button [3], and HTML now allows >>> use of the button [4]. I believe we can do the same thing. >>> >>> As discussed in #165, there are still some details to figure out: >>> >>> * We need Philippe or someone else with admin access to verify >>> both types are allowed in the GitHub repo settings [5]. >>> * Rebasing/merging: Rebasing might cause problems for history. >>> (See the last paragraph below.) We might instead need to use >>> merges when updating PRs. Either way, the squashed commit should >>> be a single commit. >>> >>> o We might need to experiment here. >>> >>> Can GitHub really squash the commits if there are merges in there ? >>> That seems like a process that could result in conflicts. >>> >>> We may need to do the following: >>> >>> (1) Create a new branch off the PR branch >>> >>> (2) Rebase in that new branch, force push >>> >>> (3) Make a new PR from the new branch and merge this, with squashing >>> >>> (4) Decline the original PR >>> >>> Each change would then have two PRs, the original one which documents >>> the history and discussion and a rebased one which has the clean >>> changes to the then-latest specification, still in separate commits. >>> >>> ...Mark >>> >>> >>> >>> o As an aside, it's helpful to the reviewer to delay >>> rebasing/merging until the end. >>> >>> The process will be approximately: >>> >>> * Push the green "Merge pull request" button. >>> * Review and clean up the commit message. >>> * Select "Confirm squash and merge" >>> >>> Using the button should pretty much eliminate forced pushes, which >>> can cause diffs with comments to be lost as mentioned in #165. >>> >>> [1] https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media/blob/gh-pages/TEAM.md >>> >>> [2] >>> >>> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-media/2015Nov/0011.ht >>> ml >>> >>> [3] https://github.com/blog/2141-squash-your-commits >>> >>> [4] https://github.com/whatwg/html/blob/master/TEAM.md >>> >>> [5] >>> >>> >>> https://help.github.com/articles/configuring-pull-request-merge-squashing/ >>> >>>
Received on Friday, 13 May 2016 01:16:06 UTC