Re: [cdt-dev] CDT and GitHub (was: RE: Unit testing support for Eclipse

["Schaefer, Doug" <Doug.Schaefer@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I think we can describe in the IPzilla what the list of commits are.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andrew Overholt [mailto:overholt@xxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 31, 2011 4:19 PM
> To: Marc Khouzam
> Cc: 'CDT General developers list.'; Schaefer, Doug
> Subject: Re: [cdt-dev] CDT and GitHub (was: RE: Unit testing support for
> Eclipse CDT)
> 
> * Marc Khouzam <marc.khouzam@xxxxxxxxxxxx> [2011-08-31 16:13]:
> > >   Create unit tests for Helgrind
> > >   https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=345863
> > >
> > > The contributor's GitHub commit (referenced in the bug):
> > >
> > > https://github.com/danielhb/linuxtools/commit/3103bea0dceb75a2
> > > 2e65f716d7cfc602a124586e
> >
> > Just to be sure, when you fetch such a commit, you will actually get a
> > set of commits, if the contributor made his/her change using multiple
> > commits.  That way, we keep the history.  Right?
> 
> In the case of this particular work, it was a single commit which I cherry-
> picked.  You can always cherry-pick multiple commits or rebase or something
> else.
> 
> > > http://git.eclipse.org/c/linuxtools/org.eclipse.linuxtools.git
> > > /commit/?id=cdd81a6ee600ef97e14fa191743415ea6457f576
> > >
> > > As you can see, the committer is set to me and the author remains as
> > > the contributor.
> >
> > What is not clear is how the CQ is handled.  In your case, you
> > attached an actual patch to the CQ.  Normally, we won't have such a
> > patch.
> 
> Yeah, it was originally submitted as a patch and I verified that the resulting git
> commit had the exact same content.  One could always generate a patch
> (using EGit [1] or `git diff`) for use in the CQ.
> 
> > http://wiki.eclipse.org/Development_Resources/Handling_Git_Contributio
> > ns mentions to include "the URL of the ref" of the commit.
> > But if the change is actually is a set of commit should we specify the
> > first and last commit maybe?  So that the IP reviewer knows what is
> > the new code?
> 
> Sure, that's an option.  If I were a contributor, I'd try to squash my commits
> into as few as makes sense.  Don't forget that git commits all have pointers to
> their parents so it's easy to see where things diverged.
> 
> Andrew
> 
> [1]
> http://wiki.eclipse.org/EGit/User_Guide#Creating_Patches