Katello PRs and merge vs. squash commits

Development
21

I love tig for viewing changes and commits. I tried 'tig --no-merges' and
the result was not pretty.

··· On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 10:45 AM, David Davis wrote:

To me, that’s a problem with the way you’re viewing your git history and
not the actual git history itself. Not sure about tig but again I think if
you use options with git log like --max-parents, --no-merges, etc, it makes
working with the merge history model far easier:

https://i.imgur.com/DslYmSU.png

David

On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 5:36 AM, Daniel Lobato Garcia elobatocs@gmail.com > wrote:

On 04/07, David Davis wrote:

How are you viewing the history? There’s a bunch of great git log
options
like “–no-merges” that make the git history on katello easier to parse.

This is how it looks like - top is Katello, bottom is Foreman:

http://i.imgur.com/2UDS6qK.png

I’m viewing it using tig and it is really messy. The main issue I have
with non-linear histories is how difficult it is to go back and branch
from a certain point in time, revert commits, etc… I used to do that a
lot :confused: In our kind of model where we always keep pushing forward it’s
not critical, granted. If it affected the development of the project,
I’m sure Katello would’ve moved to a linear history a long time ago! :slight_smile:

David

On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 11:24 AM, Stephen Benjamin stephen@redhat.com >> > wrote:

----- Original Message -----

From: “Adam Price” adprice@redhat.com
To: foreman-dev@googlegroups.com
Sent: Thursday, April 7, 2016 11:03:09 AM
Subject: Re: [foreman-dev] Katello PRs and merge vs. squash commits

----- Original Message -----

It’s not ideal, but I don’t really mind when that happens, if
it’s

for

the sake of having a clean history. You can squash all your
changes

in

that branch into 2 clean commits that can be cp-ed if you’re
working

with someone else if you want to preserve authorship.

Exactly, I think these are rare cases when you have multiple
authors

and

rebasing/pushing is matter of few commands while keeping all the
authors.

It has to be the only option, otherwise we are not getting linear
history.

–
Later,
Lukas #lzap Zapletal

I don’t understand why linear history is so important. We have 30+
people

working on these projects. The history is going to get a little
messy.

That’s why we use git.

We do indeed have a lot of people working together, on a lot of
different

GitHub
projects across the Foreman and Katello orgs. Why not standardize on
1

way of
doing things when we can?

Personally, I find the linear histories much easier to work with.
Katello’s history
is horrendously difficult to parse.

–

  • adam price

–
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups

“foreman-dev” group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
send an

email to foreman-dev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

–
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups

“foreman-dev” group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
send an

email to foreman-dev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

–
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups “foreman-dev” group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
an email to foreman-dev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

–
Daniel Lobato Garcia

@dLobatog
blog.daniellobato.me
daniellobato.me

GPG: http://keys.gnupg.net/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x7A92D6DD38D6DE30
Keybase: https://keybase.io/elobato

–
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"foreman-dev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to foreman-dev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

–
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"foreman-dev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to foreman-dev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

–
Eric D. Helms
Red Hat Engineering
Ph.D. Student - North Carolina State University

22

> I love tig for viewing changes and commits. I tried 'tig --no-merges' and
> the result was not pretty.

+1 I am also happy tig user and the option actually make the output
worse.

One note - before turning anything on, let's modify our community
guides.

··· -- Later, Lukas #lzap Zapletal
23

Recapping as best as I can:

  • General consensus is yes to using squash and merge
  • There is concern over multi-author PRs that come about with large
    features
  • General consensus is to try it out and see
  • Discussion of updating theforeman.org docs to reflect the use of squash
    and merge

Recommendations:

  • For all Katello repositories, turn on only squash and merge
  • Monitor and loop on feedback as developers begin to use it and use cases
    sprout up
  • Open a PR to theforeman.org to update documentation

Comments?

Eric

··· On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 5:55 AM, Lukas Zapletal wrote:

I love tig for viewing changes and commits. I tried ‘tig --no-merges’ and
the result was not pretty.

+1 I am also happy tig user and the option actually make the output
worse.

One note - before turning anything on, let’s modify our community
guides.

–
Later,
Lukas #lzap Zapletal

–
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"foreman-dev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to foreman-dev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

–
Eric D. Helms
Red Hat Engineering
Ph.D. Student - North Carolina State University

24

Yeah, let's try it out.

··· ----- Original Message -----

Recapping as best as I can:

  • General consensus is yes to using squash and merge
  • There is concern over multi-author PRs that come about with large features
  • General consensus is to try it out and see
  • Discussion of updating theforeman.org docs to reflect the use of squash and
    merge

Recommendations:

  • For all Katello repositories, turn on only squash and merge
  • Monitor and loop on feedback as developers begin to use it and use cases
    sprout up
  • Open a PR to theforeman.org to update documentation

Comments?

Eric

On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 5:55 AM, Lukas Zapletal < lzap@redhat.com > wrote:

I love tig for viewing changes and commits. I tried ‘tig --no-merges’ and

the result was not pretty.

+1 I am also happy tig user and the option actually make the output

worse.

One note - before turning anything on, let’s modify our community

guides.

–

Later,

Lukas #lzap Zapletal

–

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"foreman-dev" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to foreman-dev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com .

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout .

–
Eric D. Helms
Red Hat Engineering
Ph.D. Student - North Carolina State University

–
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"foreman-dev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to foreman-dev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com .
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout .

–

  • adam price