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

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

> -----Original Message-----
> From: cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]
> On Behalf Of Schaefer, Doug
> Sent: Wednesday, August 31, 2011 6:23 PM
> To: CDT General developers list.
> Subject: Re: [cdt-dev] CDT and GitHub (was: RE: Unit testing support for
> Eclipse CDT)
> 
> As expected, it doesn't work. Nothing changes the committer on a commit
> that's already been committed. So the proper workflow of fetching from
> github with commits from non-committers, merging into master, and then
> pushing to eclipse.org fails because of invalid committers. As I mentioned,
> this is the price we have to pay for Eclipse's current IP policy towards git.
> 
> We'll have to figure out a command-line way to get the patch in and applied.
> Or try and get the policy changed.

BTW, I've raised a bug to try the later:

   https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=356418
 
> Doug.
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:cdt-dev-
> bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]
> > On Behalf Of Schaefer, Doug
> > Sent: Wednesday, August 31, 2011 4:23 PM
> > To: CDT General developers list.
> > Subject: Re: [cdt-dev] CDT and GitHub (was: RE: Unit testing support
> > for Eclipse CDT)
> >
> > BTW, I'm testing this scenario now. Will report back in a bit.
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:cdt-dev-
> > bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]
> > > On Behalf Of Schaefer, Doug
> > > Sent: Wednesday, August 31, 2011 4:21 PM
> > > To: Andrew Overholt; Marc Khouzam
> > > Cc: 'CDT General developers list.'
> > > Subject: Re: [cdt-dev] CDT and GitHub (was: RE: Unit testing support
> > > for Eclipse CDT)
> > >
> > > 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_Contr
> > > > > ib ut io 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
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > cdt-dev mailing list
> > > cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev
> > _______________________________________________
> > cdt-dev mailing list
> > cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev
> _______________________________________________
> cdt-dev mailing list
> cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev