From: Chris Packham <judge.packham@gmail.com>
To: "Akhbari, Farshad" <farshad.akhbari@intel.com>
Cc: "git@vger.kernel.org" <git@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Git methodology question
Date: Fri, 14 May 2010 14:44:10 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <AANLkTikCHpIJYsORc2buuZkCNgg3dJAt-r7QuNI_dELv@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <F802F7F4D3C2674881AB105A9CD324A804EE0D0D8D@azsmsx504.amr.corp.intel.com>
On Fri, May 14, 2010 at 9:14 AM, Akhbari, Farshad
<farshad.akhbari@intel.com> wrote:
>
> All,
>
> I am trying to setup a "reliable" flow with git. I am sort of new to the tool and need some help from the experts. The question pertains to the way SHA1 tags can be back-tracked in parallel clones. Here is the scenario I have in mind:
>
> In order of time:
> User1 – pulls from the origin; updates, modifies, verifies and commits into his clone. This will generate SHA1_1
> User2 – pulls from the origin; updates, modifies, verifies and commits into his clone. This will generate SHA1_2
> User3 – pulls from the origin; updates, modifies, verifies and commits into his clone. This will generate SHA1_3
>
> In none of these cases, anyone is updating from each other’s clones
>
> At the end of the week, the model builder needs to merge and verify all commits from user1, user2 and user3 before pushing into the origin master.
>
> The question is,
> Can the model builder use SHA1_3 tag only to get all the updates made by user1, user2 and user3; or all SHA1 tags are needed?
>
>
>
> Thanks,
> Farshad.
>
Hi,
I'm not sure if I entirely understand your question. Is "the model
builder" a person?
Making the assumption that it is (the usual term for this would be a
project maintainer) then you might wan to have a read of the
"DISTRIBUTED WORKFLOWS" section of the gitworkflows man page [1].
The short answer, if I've understood your question, is that all 3
developers will have to submit their work to the maintainer. There are
various mechanisms for this; they can either use "git format-patch"
and "git send-email" or request that the maintainer pulls from a
repository that they have published ("git request-pull" can help by
generating a nicely formatted email message).
After the maintainer has applied the changes the developers can then
use "git pull" to get the latest changes from the origin. This will
include their change and the changes from the other developers and may
also include some merge commits.
As developers get more advanced they may start working on topic
branches and re-basing (or deleting) the branches after the maintainer
has applied their changes. Remember that in this case the topic
branches are local so the developers can do what they like with them.
The maintainer doesn't care _how_ the developers work locally they are
just concerned with the end result.
Hope that helps.
---
[1] http://www.kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/gitworkflows.html#_distributed_workflows
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-05-14 21:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-05-01 18:36 [RFD PATCH] revlist/rev-parse: Introduce --heads and --locals revision specifiers Michael J Gruber
2010-05-01 19:42 ` Jakub Narebski
2010-05-01 19:47 ` Michael J Gruber
2010-05-01 19:51 ` Jakub Narebski
2010-05-02 5:00 ` Jeff King
2010-05-02 13:43 ` Michael J Gruber
2010-05-05 3:35 ` Jeff King
2010-05-13 14:24 ` [PATCH 0/4] All is too much Michael J Gruber
2010-05-13 14:24 ` [PATCH 1/4] rev-parse: deprecate use as an option sifter Michael J Gruber
2010-05-14 15:41 ` Jakub Narebski
2010-05-14 18:52 ` Michael J Gruber
2010-05-14 19:01 ` Jakub Narebski
2010-05-14 19:22 ` Michael J Gruber
2010-05-17 14:26 ` Thomas Rast
2010-05-13 14:24 ` [PATCH 2/4] t6018: add tests for rev-list's --branches and --tags Michael J Gruber
2010-05-13 14:24 ` [PATCH 3/4] t6018: make sure all tested symbolic names are different revs Michael J Gruber
2010-05-13 14:24 ` [PATCH 4/4] revlist: Introduce --lrbranches and --locals revision specifiers Michael J Gruber
2010-05-14 6:06 ` [PATCH 0/4] All is too much Jeff King
2010-05-14 16:08 ` Michael J Gruber
2010-05-14 16:14 ` Git methodology question Akhbari, Farshad
2010-05-14 21:44 ` Chris Packham [this message]
2010-05-14 21:54 ` Avery Pennarun
2010-05-14 18:26 ` [PATCH v2 0/4] All is too much Michael J Gruber
2010-05-14 18:26 ` [PATCH v2 1/4] rev-parse: deprecate use as an option sifter Michael J Gruber
2010-05-14 18:26 ` [PATCH v2 2/4] t6018: add tests for rev-list's --branches and --tags Michael J Gruber
2010-05-14 18:26 ` [PATCH v2 3/4] t6018: make sure all tested symbolic names are different revs Michael J Gruber
2010-05-14 18:26 ` [PATCH v2 4/4] revlist: Introduce --lrbranches and --locals revision specifiers Michael J Gruber
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=AANLkTikCHpIJYsORc2buuZkCNgg3dJAt-r7QuNI_dELv@mail.gmail.com \
--to=judge.packham@gmail.com \
--cc=farshad.akhbari@intel.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).