Re: CG: basic cleanup (issue 46120044)

[dak]

https://codereview.appspot.com/46120044/diff/1/Documentation/contributor/administration.itexi
File Documentation/contributor/administration.itexi (right):

https://codereview.appspot.com/46120044/diff/1/Documentation/contributor/administration.itexi#newcode219
Documentation/contributor/administration.itexi:219: instructions in the
CG at @ref{Push access}.  Do not set
It's not just about pushing.  The Savannah terminology on the general
Git pages and the project specific pages is "project member access" or
"member access" in contrast to "anonymous access".

https://codereview.appspot.com/46120044/diff/1/Documentation/contributor/administration.itexi#newcode1574
Documentation/contributor/administration.itexi:1574: @subsubheading Push
git access
This would seem to warrant changing as well.

https://codereview.appspot.com/46120044/diff/1/Documentation/contributor/source-code.itexi
File Documentation/contributor/source-code.itexi (right):

https://codereview.appspot.com/46120044/diff/1/Documentation/contributor/source-code.itexi#newcode123
Documentation/contributor/source-code.itexi:123: command-line version of
Git 1.7 or higher.}
On 2014/01/01 06:08:09, Graham Percival wrote:
> just curious, what changed in git 1.5 vs. 1.7 that's important to
these
> instructions?

Possibly the default behavior for
git push
without arguments.  Also possible git clone behavior.  At any rate,
LilyDev seems to be 1.7, so we probably are not all that informed about
1.5 any more.

https://codereview.appspot.com/46120044/diff/1/Documentation/contributor/source-code.itexi#newcode654
Documentation/contributor/source-code.itexi:654: The branches are kept
for archival reasons.
That's not actually correct.  It's more like "These branches are for
making stable releases.  They are only to be changed by their respective
maintainers."

https://codereview.appspot.com/46120044/diff/1/Documentation/contributor/source-code.itexi#newcode1554
Documentation/contributor/source-code.itexi:1554: @node Push access
Member access.

https://codereview.appspot.com/46120044/diff/1/Documentation/contributor/source-code.itexi#newcode1745
Documentation/contributor/source-code.itexi:1745: git config
push.default matching
That's actually the worst possible setting in my experience since it
tends to push stuff you did not intend to push.  The Git documentation
explicitly says this is unsuitable for shared repositories:

           ·   matching - push all branches having the same name in both
ends.
               This is for those who prepare all the branches into a
               publishable shape and then push them out with a single
command.
               It is not appropriate for pushing into a repository
shared by
               multiple users, since locally stalled branches will
attempt a
               non-fast forward push if other users updated the branch.

               This is currently the default, but Git 2.0 will change
the
               default to simple.

I think we should rather recommend "simple" here.  It's always possible
to give explicit instructions, so it is not like the user will be
blocked.

"upstream" has the disadvantage that it will push feature branches
straight to master.  So "simple" is best.

https://codereview.appspot.com/46120044/