diff --git "a/git/mingw64/share/doc/git-doc/MyFirstContribution.html" "b/git/mingw64/share/doc/git-doc/MyFirstContribution.html" new file mode 100644--- /dev/null +++ "b/git/mingw64/share/doc/git-doc/MyFirstContribution.html" @@ -0,0 +1,2298 @@ + + + + + + + +My First Contribution to the Git Project + + + + + + +
+
+

Summary

+
+
+

This is a tutorial demonstrating the end-to-end workflow of creating a change to +the Git tree, sending it for review, and making changes based on comments.

+
+
+

Prerequisites

+
+

This tutorial assumes you’re already fairly familiar with using Git to manage +source code. The Git workflow steps will largely remain unexplained.

+
+
+
+ +
+

This tutorial aims to summarize the following documents, but the reader may find +useful additional context:

+
+
+
    +
  • +

    Documentation/SubmittingPatches

    +
    • +
  • +

    Documentation/howto/new-command.adoc

    +
    • +
+
+
+
+

Getting Help

+
+

If you get stuck, you can seek help in the following places.

+
+
+

git@vger.kernel.org

+
+

This is the main Git project mailing list where code reviews, version +announcements, design discussions, and more take place. Those interested in +contributing are welcome to post questions here. The Git list requires +plain-text-only emails and prefers inline and bottom-posting when replying to +mail; you will be CC’d in all replies to you. Optionally, you can subscribe to +the list by sending an email to <git+subscribe@vger.kernel.org> +(see https://subspace.kernel.org/subscribing.html for details). +The archive of this mailing list is +available to view in a browser.

+
+
+
+

#git-devel on Libera Chat

+
+

This IRC channel is for conversations between Git contributors. If someone is +currently online and knows the answer to your question, you can receive help +in real time. Otherwise, you can read the +scrollback to see +whether someone answered you. IRC does not allow offline private messaging, so +if you try to private message someone and then log out of IRC, they cannot +respond to you. It’s better to ask your questions in the channel so that you +can be answered if you disconnect and so that others can learn from the +conversation.

+
+
+
+

#discord on Discord

+
+

This is an unofficial Git Discord server for everyone, from people just +starting out with Git to those who develop it. It’s a great place to ask +questions, share tips, and connect with the broader Git community in real time.

+
+
+

The server has channels for general discussions and specific channels for those +who use Git and those who develop it. The server’s search functionality also +allows you to find previous conversations and answers to common questions.

+
+
+
+
+
+
+

Getting Started

+
+
+

Clone the Git Repository

+
+

Git is mirrored in a number of locations. Clone the repository from one of them; +https://git-scm.com/downloads suggests one of the best places to clone from is +the mirror on GitHub.

+
+
+
+
$ git clone https://github.com/git/git git
+$ cd git
+
+
+
+
+

Installing Dependencies

+
+

To build Git from source, you need to have a handful of dependencies installed +on your system. For a hint of what’s needed, you can take a look at +INSTALL, paying close attention to the section about Git’s dependencies on +external programs and libraries. That document mentions a way to "test-drive" +our freshly built Git without installing; that’s the method we’ll be using in +this tutorial.

+
+
+

Make sure that your environment has everything you need by building your brand +new clone of Git from the above step:

+
+
+
+
$ make
+
+
+
+ + + + + +
+
Note
+		 +The Git build is parallelizable. -j# is not included above but you can +use it as you prefer, here and elsewhere. +
+
+
+
+

Identify Problem to Solve

+
+

In this tutorial, we will add a new command, git psuh, short for “Pony Saying +‘Um, Hello”’ - a feature which has gone unimplemented despite a high frequency +of invocation during users' typical daily workflow.

+
+
+

(We’ve seen some other effort in this space with the implementation of popular +commands such as sl.)

+
+
+
+

Set Up Your Workspace

+
+

Let’s start by making a development branch to work on our changes. Per +Documentation/SubmittingPatches, since a brand new command is a new feature, +it’s fine to base your work on master. However, in the future for bugfixes, +etc., you should check that document and base it on the appropriate branch.

+
+
+

For the purposes of this document, we will base all our work on the master +branch of the upstream project. Create the psuh branch you will use for +development like so:

+
+
+
+
$ git checkout -b psuh origin/master
+
+
+
+

We’ll make a number of commits here in order to demonstrate how to send a topic +with multiple patches up for review simultaneously.

+
+
+
+
+
+

Code It Up!

+
+
+ + + + + +
+
Note
+		 +A reference implementation can be found at +https://github.com/nasamuffin/git/tree/psuh. +
+
+
+

Adding a New Command

+
+

Lots of the subcommands are written as builtins, which means they are +implemented in C and compiled into the main git executable. Implementing the +very simple psuh command as a built-in will demonstrate the structure of the +codebase, the internal API, and the process of working together as a contributor +with the reviewers and maintainer to integrate this change into the system.

+
+
+

Built-in subcommands are typically implemented in a function named "cmd_" +followed by the name of the subcommand, in a source file named after the +subcommand and contained within builtin/. So it makes sense to implement your +command in builtin/psuh.c. Create that file, and within it, write the entry +point for your command in a function matching the style and signature:

+
+
+
+
int cmd_psuh(int argc UNUSED, const char **argv UNUSED,
+             const char *prefix UNUSED, struct repository *repo UNUSED)
+
+
+
+

A few things to note:

+
+
+
    +
  • +

    A subcommand implementation takes its command line arguments +in int argc + const char **argv, like main() would.

    +
    • +
  • +

    It also takes two extra parameters, prefix and repo. What +they mean will not be discussed until much later.

    +
    • +
  • +

    Because this first example will not use any of the parameters, +your compiler will give warnings on unused parameters. As the +list of these four parameters is mandated by the API to add +new built-in commands, you cannot omit them. Instead, you add +UNUSED to each of them to tell the compiler that you know +you are not (yet) using it.

    +
    • +
+
+
+

We’ll also need to add the declaration of psuh; open up builtin.h, find the +declaration for cmd_pull, and add a new line for psuh immediately before it, +in order to keep the declarations alphabetically sorted:

+
+
+
+
int cmd_psuh(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix, struct repository *repo);
+
+
+
+

Be sure to #include "builtin.h" in your psuh.c. You’ll also need to +#include "gettext.h" to use functions related to printing output text.

+
+
+

Go ahead and add some throwaway printf to the cmd_psuh function. This is a +decent starting point as we can now add build rules and register the command.

+
+
+ + + + + +
+
Note
+		 +Your throwaway text, as well as much of the text you will be adding over +the course of this tutorial, is user-facing. That means it needs to be +localizable. Take a look at po/README under "Marking strings for translation". +Throughout the tutorial, we will mark strings for translation as necessary; you +should also do so when writing your user-facing commands in the future. +
+
+
+
+
int cmd_psuh(int argc UNUSED, const char **argv UNUSED,
+             const char *prefix UNUSED, struct repository *repo UNUSED)
+{
+        printf(_("Pony saying hello goes here.\n"));
+        return 0;
+}
+
+
+
+

Let’s try to build it. Open Makefile, find where builtin/pull.o is added +to BUILTIN_OBJS, and add builtin/psuh.o in the same way next to it in +alphabetical order. Once you’ve done so, move to the top-level directory and +build simply with make. Also add the DEVELOPER=1 variable to turn on +some additional warnings:

+
+
+
+
$ echo DEVELOPER=1 >config.mak
+$ make
+
+
+
+ + + + + +
+
Note
+		 +When you are developing the Git project, it’s preferred that you use the +DEVELOPER flag; if there’s some reason it doesn’t work for you, you can turn +it off, but it’s a good idea to mention the problem to the mailing list. +
+
+
+

Great, now your new command builds happily on its own. But nobody invokes it. +Let’s change that.

+
+
+

The list of commands lives in git.c. We can register a new command by adding +a cmd_struct to the commands[] array. struct cmd_struct takes a string +with the command name, a function pointer to the command implementation, and a +setup option flag. For now, let’s keep mimicking push. Find the line where +cmd_push is registered, copy it, and modify it for cmd_psuh, placing the new +line in alphabetical order (immediately before cmd_pull).

+
+
+

The options are documented in builtin.h under "Adding a new built-in." Since +we hope to print some data about the user’s current workspace context later, +we need a Git directory, so choose RUN_SETUP as your only option.

+
+
+

Go ahead and build again. You should see a clean build, so let’s kick the tires +and see if it works. There’s a binary you can use to test with in the +bin-wrappers directory.

+
+
+
+
$ ./bin-wrappers/git psuh
+
+
+
+

Check it out! You’ve got a command! Nice work! Let’s commit this.

+
+
+

git status reveals modified Makefile, builtin.h, and git.c as well as +untracked builtin/psuh.c and git-psuh. First, let’s take care of the binary, +which should be ignored. Open .gitignore in your editor, find /git-pull, and +add an entry for your new command in alphabetical order:

+
+
+
+
...
+/git-prune-packed
+/git-psuh
+/git-pull
+/git-push
+/git-quiltimport
+/git-range-diff
+...
+
+
+
+

Checking git status again should show that git-psuh has been removed from +the untracked list and .gitignore has been added to the modified list. Now we +can stage and commit:

+
+
+
+
$ git add Makefile builtin.h builtin/psuh.c git.c .gitignore
+$ git commit -s
+
+
+
+

You will be presented with your editor in order to write a commit message. Start +the commit with a 50-column or less subject line, including the name of the +component you’re working on, followed by a blank line (always required) and then +the body of your commit message, which should provide the bulk of the context. +Remember to be explicit and provide the "Why" of your change, especially if it +couldn’t easily be understood from your diff. When editing your commit message, +don’t remove the Signed-off-by trailer which was added by -s above.

+
+
+
+
psuh: add a built-in by popular demand
+
+Internal metrics indicate this is a command many users expect to be
+present. So here's an implementation to help drive customer
+satisfaction and engagement: a pony which doubtfully greets the user,
+or, a Pony Saying "Um, Hello" (PSUH).
+
+This commit message is intentionally formatted to 72 columns per line,
+starts with a single line as "commit message subject" that is written as
+if to command the codebase to do something (add this, teach a command
+that). The body of the message is designed to add information about the
+commit that is not readily deduced from reading the associated diff,
+such as answering the question "why?".
+
+Signed-off-by: A U Thor <author@example.com>
+
+
+
+

Go ahead and inspect your new commit with git show. "psuh:" indicates you +have modified mainly the psuh command. The subject line gives readers an idea +of what you’ve changed. The sign-off line (-s) indicates that you agree to +the Developer’s Certificate of Origin 1.1 (see the +Documentation/SubmittingPatches [[dco]] header).

+
+
+

For the remainder of the tutorial, the subject line only will be listed for the +sake of brevity. However, fully-fleshed example commit messages are available +on the reference implementation linked at the top of this document.

+
+
+
+

Implementation

+
+

It’s probably useful to do at least something besides printing out a string. +Let’s start by having a look at everything we get.

+
+
+

Modify your cmd_psuh implementation to dump the args you’re passed, +keeping existing printf() calls in place; because the args are now +used, remove the UNUSED macro from them:

+
+
+
+
        int i;
+
+        ...
+
+        printf(Q_("Your args (there is %d):\n",
+                  "Your args (there are %d):\n",
+                  argc),
+               argc);
+        for (i = 0; i < argc; i++)
+                printf("%d: %s\n", i, argv[i]);
+
+        printf(_("Your current working directory:\n<top-level>%s%s\n"),
+               prefix ? "/" : "", prefix ? prefix : "");
+
+
+
+

Build and try it. As you may expect, there’s pretty much just whatever we give +on the command line, including the name of our command. (If prefix is empty +for you, try cd Documentation/ && ../bin-wrappers/git psuh). That’s not so +helpful. So what other context can we get?

+
+
+

Add a line to #include "config.h", #include "repository.h" and +#include "environment.h". +Then, add the following bits to the function body: +function body:

+
+
+
+
        const char *cfg_name;
+
+...
+
+        repo_config(repo, git_default_config, NULL);
+        if (repo_config_get_string_tmp(repo, "user.name", &cfg_name))
+                printf(_("No name is found in config\n"));
+        else
+                printf(_("Your name: %s\n"), cfg_name);
+
+
+
+

repo_config() will grab the configuration from config files known to Git and +apply standard precedence rules. repo_config_get_string_tmp() will look up +a specific key ("user.name") and give you the value. There are a number of +single-key lookup functions like this one; you can see them all (and more info +about how to use repo_config()) in config.h.

+
+
+

You should see that the name printed matches the one you see when you run:

+
+
+
+
$ git config --get user.name
+
+
+
+

Great! Now we know how to check for values in the Git config. Let’s commit this +too, so we don’t lose our progress.

+
+
+
+
$ git add builtin/psuh.c
+$ git commit -sm "psuh: show parameters & config opts"
+
+
+
+ + + + + +
+
Note
+		 +Again, the above is for sake of brevity in this tutorial. In a real change +you should not use -m but instead use the editor to write a meaningful +message. +
+
+
+

Still, it’d be nice to know what the user’s working context is like. Let’s see +if we can print the name of the user’s current branch. We can mimic the +git status implementation; the printer is located in wt-status.c and we can +see that the branch is held in a struct wt_status.

+
+
+

wt_status_print() gets invoked by cmd_status() in builtin/commit.c. +Looking at that implementation we see the status config being populated like so:

+
+
+
+
status_init_config(&s, git_status_config);
+
+
+
+

But as we drill down, we can find that status_init_config() wraps a call +to repo_config(). Let’s modify the code we wrote in the previous commit.

+
+
+

Be sure to include the header to allow you to use struct wt_status:

+
+
+
+
#include "wt-status.h"
+
+
+
+

Then modify your cmd_psuh implementation to declare your struct wt_status, +prepare it, and print its contents:

+
+
+
+
        struct wt_status status;
+
+...
+
+        wt_status_prepare(repo, &status);
+        repo_config(repo, git_default_config, &status);
+
+...
+
+        printf(_("Your current branch: %s\n"), status.branch);
+
+
+
+

Run it again. Check it out - here’s the (verbose) name of your current branch!

+
+
+

Let’s commit this as well.

+
+
+
+
$ git add builtin/psuh.c
+$ git commit -sm "psuh: print the current branch"
+
+
+
+

Now let’s see if we can get some info about a specific commit.

+
+
+

Luckily, there are some helpers for us here. commit.h has a function called +lookup_commit_reference_by_name to which we can simply provide a hardcoded +string; pretty.h has an extremely handy pp_commit_easy() call which doesn’t +require a full format object to be passed.

+
+
+

Add the following includes:

+
+
+
+
#include "commit.h"
+#include "pretty.h"
+#include "strbuf.h"
+
+
+
+

Then, add the following lines within your implementation of cmd_psuh() near +the declarations and the logic, respectively.

+
+
+
+
        struct commit *c = NULL;
+        struct strbuf commitline = STRBUF_INIT;
+
+...
+
+        c = lookup_commit_reference_by_name("origin/master");
+
+        if (c != NULL) {
+                pp_commit_easy(CMIT_FMT_ONELINE, c, &commitline);
+                printf(_("Current commit: %s\n"), commitline.buf);
+        }
+
+
+
+

The struct strbuf provides some safety belts to your basic char*, one of +which is a length member to prevent buffer overruns. It needs to be initialized +nicely with STRBUF_INIT. Keep it in mind when you need to pass around char*.

+
+
+

lookup_commit_reference_by_name resolves the name you pass it, so you can play +with the value there and see what kind of things you can come up with.

+
+
+

pp_commit_easy is a convenience wrapper in pretty.h that takes a single +format enum shorthand, rather than an entire format struct. It then +pretty-prints the commit according to that shorthand. These are similar to the +formats available with --pretty=FOO in many Git commands.

+
+
+

Build it and run, and if you’re using the same name in the example, you should +see the subject line of the most recent commit in origin/master that you know +about. Neat! Let’s commit that as well.

+
+
+
+
$ git add builtin/psuh.c
+$ git commit -sm "psuh: display the top of origin/master"
+
+
+
+
+

Adding Documentation

+
+

Awesome! You’ve got a fantastic new command that you’re ready to share with the +community. But hang on just a minute - this isn’t very user-friendly. Run the +following:

+
+
+
+
$ ./bin-wrappers/git help psuh
+
+
+
+

Your new command is undocumented! Let’s fix that.

+
+
+

Take a look at Documentation/git-*.adoc. These are the manpages for the +subcommands that Git knows about. You can open these up and take a look to get +acquainted with the format, but then go ahead and make a new file +Documentation/git-psuh.adoc. Like with most of the documentation in the Git +project, help pages are written with AsciiDoc (see CodingGuidelines, "Writing +Documentation" section). Use the following template to fill out your own +manpage:

+
+
+
+
git-psuh(1)
+===========
+
+NAME
+----
+git-psuh - Delight users' typo with a shy horse
+
+
+SYNOPSIS
+--------
+[synopsis]
+git psuh [<arg>...]
+
+DESCRIPTION
+-----------
+...
+
+OPTIONS[[OPTIONS]]
+------------------
+...
+
+OUTPUT
+------
+...
+
+GIT
+---
+Part of the linkgit:git[1] suite
+
+
+
+

The most important pieces of this to note are the file header, underlined by =, +the NAME section, and the SYNOPSIS, which would normally contain the grammar if +your command took arguments. Try to use well-established manpage headers so your +documentation is consistent with other Git and UNIX manpages; this makes life +easier for your user, who can skip to the section they know contains the +information they need.

+
+
+ + + + + +
+
Note
+		 +Before trying to build the docs, make sure you have the package asciidoc +installed. +
+
+
+

Now that you’ve written your manpage, you’ll need to build it explicitly. We +convert your AsciiDoc to troff which is man-readable like so:

+
+
+
+
$ make all doc
+$ man Documentation/git-psuh.1
+
+
+
+

or

+
+
+
+
$ make -C Documentation/ git-psuh.1
+$ man Documentation/git-psuh.1
+
+
+
+

While this isn’t as satisfying as running through git help, you can at least +check that your help page looks right.

+
+
+

You can also check that the documentation coverage is good (that is, the project +sees that your command has been implemented as well as documented) by running +make check-docs from the top-level.

+
+
+

Go ahead and commit your new documentation change.

+
+
+
+

Adding Usage Text

+
+

Try and run ./bin-wrappers/git psuh -h. Your command should crash at the end. +That’s because -h is a special case which your command should handle by +printing usage.

+
+
+

Take a look at Documentation/technical/api-parse-options.adoc. This is a handy +tool for pulling out options you need to be able to handle, and it takes a +usage string.

+
+
+

In order to use it, we’ll need to prepare a NULL-terminated array of usage +strings and a builtin_psuh_options array.

+
+
+

Add a line to #include "parse-options.h".

+
+
+

At global scope, add your array of usage strings:

+
+
+
+
static const char * const psuh_usage[] = {
+        N_("git psuh [<arg>...]"),
+        NULL,
+};
+
+
+
+

Then, within your cmd_psuh() implementation, we can declare and populate our +option struct. Ours is pretty boring but you can add more to it if you want to +explore parse_options() in more detail:

+
+
+
+
        struct option options[] = {
+                OPT_END()
+        };
+
+
+
+

Finally, before you print your args and prefix, add the call to +parse-options():

+
+
+
+
        argc = parse_options(argc, argv, prefix, options, psuh_usage, 0);
+
+
+
+

This call will modify your argv parameter. It will strip the options you +specified in options from argv and the locations pointed to from options +entries will be updated. Be sure to replace your argc with the result from +parse_options(), or you will be confused if you try to parse argv later.

+
+
+

It’s worth noting the special argument --. As you may be aware, many Unix +commands use -- to indicate "end of named parameters" - all parameters after +the -- are interpreted merely as positional arguments. (This can be handy if +you want to pass as a parameter something which would usually be interpreted as +a flag.) parse_options() will terminate parsing when it reaches -- and give +you the rest of the options afterwards, untouched.

+
+
+

Now that you have a usage hint, you can teach Git how to show it in the general +command list shown by git help git or git help -a, which is generated from +command-list.txt. Find the line for git-pull so you can add your git-psuh +line above it in alphabetical order. Now, we can add some attributes about the +command which impacts where it shows up in the aforementioned help commands. The +top of command-list.txt shares some information about what each attribute +means; in those help pages, the commands are sorted according to these +attributes. git psuh is user-facing, or porcelain - so we will mark it as +"mainporcelain". For "mainporcelain" commands, the comments at the top of +command-list.txt indicate we can also optionally add an attribute from another +list; since git psuh shows some information about the user’s workspace but +doesn’t modify anything, let’s mark it as "info". Make sure to keep your +attributes in the same style as the rest of command-list.txt using spaces to +align and delineate them:

+
+
+
+
git-prune-packed                        plumbingmanipulators
+git-psuh                                mainporcelain           info
+git-pull                                mainporcelain           remote
+git-push                                mainporcelain           remote
+
+
+
+

Build again. Now, when you run with -h, you should see your usage printed and +your command terminated before anything else interesting happens. Great!

+
+
+

Go ahead and commit this one, too.

+
+
+
+
+
+

Testing

+
+
+

It’s important to test your code - even for a little toy command like this one. +Moreover, your patch won’t be accepted into the Git tree without tests. Your +tests should:

+
+
+
    +
  • +

    Illustrate the current behavior of the feature

    +
    • +
  • +

    Prove the current behavior matches the expected behavior

    +
    • +
  • +

    Ensure the externally-visible behavior isn’t broken in later changes

    +
    • +
+
+
+

So let’s write some tests.

+
+
+

Related reading: t/README

+
+
+

Overview of Testing Structure

+
+

The tests in Git live in t/ and are named with a 4-digit decimal number using +the schema shown in the Naming Tests section of t/README.

+
+
+
+

Writing Your Test

+
+

Since this a toy command, let’s go ahead and name the test with t9999. However, +as many of the family/subcmd combinations are full, best practice seems to be +to find a command close enough to the one you’ve added and share its naming +space.

+
+
+

Create a new file t/t9999-psuh-tutorial.sh. Begin with the header as so (see +"Writing Tests" and "Source test-lib.sh" in t/README):

+
+
+
+
#!/bin/sh
+
+test_description='git-psuh test
+
+This test runs git-psuh and makes sure it does not crash.'
+
+. ./test-lib.sh
+
+
+
+

Tests are framed inside of a test_expect_success in order to output TAP +formatted results. Let’s make sure that git psuh doesn’t exit poorly and does +mention the right animal somewhere:

+
+
+
+
test_expect_success 'runs correctly with no args and good output' '
+        git psuh >actual &&
+        grep Pony actual
+'
+
+
+
+

Indicate that you’ve run everything you wanted by adding the following at the +bottom of your script:

+
+
+
+
test_done
+
+
+
+

Make sure you mark your test script executable:

+
+
+
+
$ chmod +x t/t9999-psuh-tutorial.sh
+
+
+
+

You can get an idea of whether you created your new test script successfully +by running make -C t test-lint, which will check for things like test number +uniqueness, executable bit, and so on.

+
+
+
+

Running Locally

+
+

Let’s try and run locally:

+
+
+
+
$ make
+$ cd t/ && prove t9999-psuh-tutorial.sh
+
+
+
+

You can run the full test suite and ensure git-psuh didn’t break anything:

+
+
+
+
$ cd t/
+$ prove -j$(nproc) --shuffle t[0-9]*.sh
+
+
+
+ + + + + +
+
Note
+		 +You can also do this with make test or use any testing harness which can +speak TAP. prove can run concurrently. -j$(nproc) runs tests using all +available CPUs in parallel, but the job count can be adjusted as needed. +shuffle randomizes the order the tests are run in, which makes them resilient +against unwanted inter-test dependencies. prove also makes the output nicer. +
+
+
+

Go ahead and commit this change, as well.

+
+
+
+
+
+

Getting Ready to Share: Anatomy of a Patch Series

+
+
+

You may have noticed already that the Git project performs its code reviews via +emailed patches, which are then applied by the maintainer when they are ready +and approved by the community. The Git project does not accept contributions from +pull requests, and the patches emailed for review need to be formatted a +specific way.

+
+
+

Before taking a look at how to convert your commits into emailed patches, +let’s analyze what the end result, a "patch series", looks like. Here is an +example of the summary view for a patch series on the web interface of +the Git mailing list archive:

+
+
+
+
2022-02-18 18:40 [PATCH 0/3] libify reflog John Cai via GitGitGadget
+2022-02-18 18:40 ` [PATCH 1/3] reflog: libify delete reflog function and helpers John Cai via GitGitGadget
+2022-02-18 19:10   ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason [this message]
+2022-02-18 19:39     ` Taylor Blau
+2022-02-18 19:48       ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
+2022-02-18 19:35   ` Taylor Blau
+2022-02-21  1:43     ` John Cai
+2022-02-21  1:50       ` Taylor Blau
+2022-02-23 19:50         ` John Cai
+2022-02-18 20:00   ` // other replies elided
+2022-02-18 18:40 ` [PATCH 2/3] reflog: call reflog_delete from reflog.c John Cai via GitGitGadget
+2022-02-18 19:15   ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
+2022-02-18 20:26     ` Junio C Hamano
+2022-02-18 18:40 ` [PATCH 3/3] stash: call reflog_delete from reflog.c John Cai via GitGitGadget
+2022-02-18 19:20   ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
+2022-02-19  0:21     ` Taylor Blau
+2022-02-22  2:36     ` John Cai
+2022-02-22 10:51       ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
+2022-02-18 19:29 ` [PATCH 0/3] libify reflog Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
+2022-02-22 18:30 ` [PATCH v2 0/3] libify reflog John Cai via GitGitGadget
+2022-02-22 18:30   ` [PATCH v2 1/3] stash: add test to ensure reflog --rewrite --updatref behavior John Cai via GitGitGadget
+2022-02-23  8:54     ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
+2022-02-23 21:27       ` Junio C Hamano
+// continued
+
+
+
+

We can note a few things:

+
+
+
    +
  • +

    Each commit is sent as a separate email, with the commit message title as +subject, prefixed with "[PATCH i/n]" for the i-th commit of an +n-commit series.

    +
    • +
  • +

    Each patch is sent as a reply to an introductory email called the cover +letter of the series, prefixed "[PATCH 0/n]".

    +
    • +
  • +

    Subsequent iterations of the patch series are labelled "PATCH v2", "PATCH +v3", etc. in place of "PATCH". For example, "[PATCH v2 1/3]" would be the first of +three patches in the second iteration. Each iteration is sent with a new cover +letter (like "[PATCH v2 0/3]" above), itself a reply to the cover letter of the +previous iteration (more on that below).

    +
    • +
+
+
+ + + + + +
+
Note
+		 +A single-patch topic is sent with "[PATCH]", "[PATCH v2]", etc. without +i/n numbering (in the above thread overview, no single-patch topic appears, +though). +
+
+
+

The cover letter

+
+

In addition to an email per patch, the Git community also expects your patches +to come with a cover letter. This is an important component of change +submission as it explains to the community from a high level what you’re trying +to do, and why, in a way that’s more apparent than just looking at your +patches.

+
+
+

The title of your cover letter should be something which succinctly covers the +purpose of your entire topic branch. It’s often in the imperative mood, just +like our commit message titles. Here is how we’ll title our series:

+
+
+
+

Add the psuh command +---

+
+
+

The body of the cover letter is used to give additional context to reviewers. +Be sure to explain anything your patches don’t make clear on their own, but +remember that since the cover letter is not recorded in the commit history, +anything that might be useful to future readers of the repository’s history +should also be in your commit messages.

+
+
+

Here’s an example body for psuh:

+
+
+
+
Our internal metrics indicate widespread interest in the command
+git-psuh - that is, many users are trying to use it, but finding it is
+unavailable, using some unknown workaround instead.
+
+The following handful of patches add the psuh command and implement some
+handy features on top of it.
+
+This patchset is part of the MyFirstContribution tutorial and should not
+be merged.
+
+
+
+

At this point the tutorial diverges, in order to demonstrate two +different methods of formatting your patchset and getting it reviewed.

+
+
+

The first method to be covered is GitGitGadget, which is useful for those +already familiar with GitHub’s common pull request workflow. This method +requires a GitHub account.

+
+
+

The second method to be covered is git send-email, which can give slightly +more fine-grained control over the emails to be sent. This method requires some +setup which can change depending on your system and will not be covered in this +tutorial.

+
+
+

Regardless of which method you choose, your engagement with reviewers will be +the same; the review process will be covered after the sections on GitGitGadget +and git send-email.

+
+
+
+
+
+

Sending Patches via GitGitGadget

+
+
+

One option for sending patches is to follow a typical pull request workflow and +send your patches out via GitGitGadget. GitGitGadget is a tool created by +Johannes Schindelin to make life as a Git contributor easier for those used to +the GitHub PR workflow. It allows contributors to open pull requests against its +mirror of the Git project, and does some magic to turn the PR into a set of +emails and send them out for you. It also runs the Git continuous integration +suite for you. It’s documented at https://gitgitgadget.github.io/.

+
+
+

Forking git/git on GitHub

+
+

Before you can send your patch off to be reviewed using GitGitGadget, you will +need to fork the Git project and upload your changes. First thing - make sure +you have a GitHub account.

+
+
+

Head to the GitHub mirror and look for the Fork +button. Place your fork wherever you deem appropriate and create it.

+
+
+
+

Uploading to Your Own Fork

+
+

To upload your branch to your own fork, you’ll need to add the new fork as a +remote. You can use git remote -v to show the remotes you have added already. +From your new fork’s page on GitHub, you can press "Clone or download" to get +the URL; then you need to run the following to add, replacing your own URL and +remote name for the examples provided:

+
+
+
+
$ git remote add remotename git@github.com:remotename/git.git
+
+
+
+

or to use the HTTPS URL:

+
+
+
+
$ git remote add remotename https://github.com/remotename/git/.git
+
+
+
+

Run git remote -v again and you should see the new remote showing up. +git fetch remotename (with the real name of your remote replaced) in order to +get ready to push.

+
+
+

Next, double-check that you’ve been doing all your development in a new branch +by running git branch. If you didn’t, now is a good time to move your new +commits to their own branch.

+
+
+

As mentioned briefly at the beginning of this document, we are basing our work +on master, so go ahead and update as shown below, or using your preferred +workflow.

+
+
+
+
$ git checkout master
+$ git pull -r
+$ git rebase master psuh
+
+
+
+

Finally, you’re ready to push your new topic branch! (Due to our branch and +command name choices, be careful when you type the command below.)

+
+
+
+
$ git push remotename psuh
+
+
+
+

Now you should be able to go and check out your newly created branch on GitHub.

+
+
+
+

Sending a PR to GitGitGadget

+
+

In order to have your code tested and formatted for review, you need to start by +opening a Pull Request against either gitgitgadget/git or git/git. Head to +https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git or https://github.com/git/git and open a PR +either with the "New pull request" button or the convenient "Compare & pull +request" button that may appear with the name of your newly pushed branch.

+
+
+

The differences between using gitgitgadget/git and git/git as your base can +be found [here](https://gitgitgadget.github.io/#should-i-use-gitgitgadget-on-gitgitgadgets-git-fork-or-on-gits-github-mirror)

+
+
+

Review the PR’s title and description, as they’re used by GitGitGadget +respectively as the subject and body of the cover letter for your change. Refer +to "The cover letter" above for advice on how to title your +submission and what content to include in the description.

+
+
+ + + + + +
+
Note
+		 +For single-patch contributions, your commit message should already be +meaningful and explain at a high level the purpose (what is happening and why) +of your patch, so you usually do not need any additional context. In that case, +remove the PR description that GitHub automatically generates from your commit +message (your PR description should be empty). If you do need to supply even +more context, you can do so in that space and it will be appended to the email +that GitGitGadget will send, between the three-dash line and the diffstat +(see Bonus Chapter: One-Patch Changes for how this looks once +submitted). +
+
+
+

When you’re happy, submit your pull request.

+
+
+
+

Running CI and Getting Ready to Send

+
+

If it’s your first time using GitGitGadget (which is likely, as you’re using +this tutorial) then someone will need to give you permission to use the tool. +As mentioned in the GitGitGadget documentation, you just need someone who +already uses it to comment on your PR with /allow <username>. GitGitGadget +will automatically run your PRs through the CI even without the permission given +but you will not be able to /submit your changes until someone allows you to +use the tool.

+
+
+ + + + + +
+
Note
+		 +You can typically find someone who can /allow you on GitGitGadget by +either examining recent pull requests where someone has been granted /allow +(Search: +is:pr is:open "/allow"), in which case both the author and the person who +granted the /allow can now /allow you, or by inquiring on the +#git-devel IRC channel on Libera Chat +linking your pull request and asking for someone to /allow you. +
+
+
+

If the CI fails, you can update your changes with git rebase -i and push your +branch again:

+
+
+
+
$ git push -f remotename psuh
+
+
+
+

In fact, you should continue to make changes this way up until the point when +your patch is accepted into next.

+
+
+
+

Sending Your Patches

+
+

Now that your CI is passing and someone has granted you permission to use +GitGitGadget with the /allow command, sending out for review is as simple as +commenting on your PR with /submit.

+
+
+
+

Updating With Comments

+
+

Skip ahead to Responding to Reviews for information on how to +reply to review comments you will receive on the mailing list.

+
+
+

Once you have your branch again in the shape you want following all review +comments, you can submit again:

+
+
+
+
$ git push -f remotename psuh
+
+
+
+

Next, go look at your pull request against GitGitGadget; you should see the CI +has been kicked off again. Now while the CI is running is a good time for you +to modify your description at the top of the pull request thread; it will be +used again as the cover letter. You should use this space to describe what +has changed since your previous version, so that your reviewers have some idea +of what they’re looking at. When the CI is done running, you can comment once +more with /submit - GitGitGadget will automatically add a v2 mark to your +changes.

+
+
+
+
+
+

Sending Patches with git send-email

+
+
+

If you don’t want to use GitGitGadget, you can also use Git itself to mail your +patches. Some benefits of using Git this way include finer grained control of +subject line (for example, being able to use the tag [RFC PATCH] in the subject) +and being able to send a “dry run” mail to yourself to ensure it all looks +good before going out to the list.

+
+
+

Prerequisite: Setting Up git send-email

+
+

Configuration for send-email can vary based on your operating system and email +provider, and so will not be covered in this tutorial, beyond stating that in +many distributions of Linux, git-send-email is not packaged alongside the +typical git install. You may need to install this additional package; there +are a number of resources online to help you do so. You will also need to +determine the right way to configure it to use your SMTP server; again, as this +configuration can change significantly based on your system and email setup, it +is out of scope for the context of this tutorial.

+
+
+
+

Preparing Initial Patchset

+
+

Sending emails with Git is a two-part process; before you can prepare the emails +themselves, you’ll need to prepare the patches. Luckily, this is pretty simple:

+
+
+
+
$ git format-patch --cover-letter -o psuh/ --base=auto psuh@{u}..psuh
+
+
+
+
    +
  1. +

    The --cover-letter option tells format-patch to create a +cover letter template for you. You will need to fill in the +template before you’re ready to send - but for now, the template +will be next to your other patches.

    +
    2. +
  2. +

    The -o psuh/ option tells format-patch to place the patch +files into a directory. This is useful because git send-email +can take a directory and send out all the patches from there.

    +
    3. +
  3. +

    The --base=auto option tells the command to record the "base +commit", on which the recipient is expected to apply the patch +series. The auto value will cause format-patch to compute +the base commit automatically, which is the merge base of tip +commit of the remote-tracking branch and the specified revision +range.

    +
    4. +
  4. +

    The psuh@{u}..psuh option tells format-patch to generate +patches for the commits you created on the psuh branch since it +forked from its upstream (which is origin/master if you +followed the example in the "Set up your workspace" section). If +you are already on the psuh branch, you can just say @{u}, +which means "commits on the current branch since it forked from +its upstream", which is the same thing.

    +
    5. +
+
+
+

The command will make one patch file per commit. After you +run, you can go have a look at each of the patches with your favorite text +editor and make sure everything looks alright; however, it’s not recommended to +make code fixups via the patch file. It’s a better idea to make the change the +normal way using git rebase -i or by adding a new commit than by modifying a +patch.

+
+
+ + + + + +
+
Note
+		 +Optionally, you can also use the --rfc flag to prefix your patch subject +with “[RFC PATCH]” instead of “[PATCH]”. RFC stands for “request for +comments” and indicates that while your code isn’t quite ready for submission, +you’d like to begin the code review process. This can also be used when your +patch is a proposal, but you aren’t sure whether the community wants to solve +the problem with that approach or not - to conduct a sort of design review. You +may also see on the list patches marked “WIP” - this means they are incomplete +but want reviewers to look at what they have so far. You can add this flag with +--subject-prefix=WIP. +
+
+
+

Check and make sure that your patches and cover letter template exist in the +directory you specified - you’re nearly ready to send out your review!

+
+
+
+

Preparing Email

+
+

Since you invoked format-patch with --cover-letter, you’ve already got a +cover letter template ready. Open it up in your favorite editor.

+
+
+

You should see a number of headers present already. Check that your From: +header is correct. Then modify your Subject: (see above for +how to choose good title for your patch series):

+
+
+
+
Subject: [PATCH 0/7] Add the 'psuh' command
+
+
+
+

Make sure you retain the “[PATCH 0/X]” part; that’s what indicates to the Git +community that this email is the beginning of a patch series, and many +reviewers filter their email for this type of flag.

+
+
+

You’ll need to add some extra parameters when you invoke git send-email to add +the cover letter.

+
+
+

Next you’ll have to fill out the body of your cover letter. Again, see +above for what content to include.

+
+
+

The template created by git format-patch --cover-letter includes a diffstat. +This gives reviewers a summary of what they’re in for when reviewing your topic. +The one generated for psuh from the sample implementation looks like this:

+
+
+
+
 Documentation/git-psuh.adoc | 40 +++++++++++++++++++++
+ Makefile                    |  1 +
+ builtin.h                   |  1 +
+ builtin/psuh.c              | 73 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+ git.c                       |  1 +
+ t/t9999-psuh-tutorial.sh    | 12 +++++++
+ 6 files changed, 128 insertions(+)
+ create mode 100644 Documentation/git-psuh.adoc
+ create mode 100644 builtin/psuh.c
+ create mode 100755 t/t9999-psuh-tutorial.sh
+
+
+
+

Finally, the letter will include the version of Git used to generate the +patches. You can leave that string alone.

+
+
+
+

Sending Email

+
+

At this point you should have a directory psuh/ which is filled with your +patches and a cover letter. Time to mail it out! You can send it like this:

+
+
+
+
$ git send-email --to=target@example.com psuh/*.patch
+
+
+
+ + + + + +
+
Note
+		 +Check git help send-email for some other options which you may find +valuable, such as changing the Reply-to address or adding more CC and BCC lines. +
+
+
+ + + + + +
+
Note
+		 +If you’re not sure whom to CC, running contrib/contacts/git-contacts can +list potential reviewers. In addition, you can do git send-email +--cc-cmd='perl contrib/contacts/git-contacts' feature/*.patch[1] to +automatically pass this list of emails to send-email. +
+
+
+ + + + + +
+
Note
+		 +When you are sending a real patch, it will go to git@vger.kernel.org - but +please don’t send your patchset from the tutorial to the real mailing list! For +now, you can send it to yourself, to make sure you understand how it will look. +
+
+
+ + + + + +
+
Note
+		 +After sending your patches, you can confirm that they reached the mailing +list by visiting https://lore.kernel.org/git/. Use the search bar to find your +name or the subject of your patch. If it appears, your email was successfully +delivered. +
+
+
+

After you run the command above, you will be presented with an interactive +prompt for each patch that’s about to go out. This gives you one last chance to +edit or quit sending something (but again, don’t edit code this way). Once you +press y or a at these prompts your emails will be sent! Congratulations!

+
+
+

Awesome, now the community will drop everything and review your changes. (Just +kidding - be patient!)

+
+
+
+

Sending v2

+
+

This section will focus on how to send a v2 of your patchset. To learn what +should go into v2, skip ahead to Responding to Reviews for +information on how to handle comments from reviewers.

+
+
+

We’ll reuse our psuh topic branch for v2. Before we make any changes, we’ll +mark the tip of our v1 branch for easy reference:

+
+
+
+
$ git checkout psuh
+$ git branch psuh-v1
+
+
+
+

Refine your patch series by using git rebase -i to adjust commits based upon +reviewer comments. Once the patch series is ready for submission, generate your +patches again, but with some new flags:

+
+
+
+
$ git format-patch -v2 --cover-letter -o psuh/ --range-diff master..psuh-v1 master..
+
+
+
+

The --range-diff master..psuh-v1 parameter tells format-patch to include a +range-diff between psuh-v1 and psuh in the cover letter (see +git-range-diff(1)). This helps tell reviewers about the differences +between your v1 and v2 patches.

+
+
+

The -v2 parameter tells format-patch to output your patches +as version "2". For instance, you may notice that your v2 patches are +all named like v2-000n-my-commit-subject.patch. -v2 will also format +your patches by prefixing them with "[PATCH v2]" instead of "[PATCH]", +and your range-diff will be prefaced with "Range-diff against v1".

+
+
+

After you run this command, format-patch will output the patches to the psuh/ +directory, alongside the v1 patches. Using a single directory makes it easy to +refer to the old v1 patches while proofreading the v2 patches, but you will need +to be careful to send out only the v2 patches. We will use a pattern like +psuh/v2-*.patch (not psuh/*.patch, which would match v1 and v2 patches).

+
+
+

Edit your cover letter again. Now is a good time to mention what’s different +between your last version and now, if it’s something significant. You do not +need the exact same body in your second cover letter; focus on explaining to +reviewers the changes you’ve made that may not be as visible.

+
+
+

You will also need to go and find the Message-ID of your previous cover letter. +You can either note it when you send the first series, from the output of git +send-email, or you can look it up on the +mailing list. Find your cover letter in the +archives, click on it, then click "permalink" or "raw" to reveal the Message-ID +header. It should match:

+
+
+
+
Message-ID: <foo.12345.author@example.com>
+
+
+
+

Your Message-ID is <foo.12345.author@example.com>. This example will be used +below as well; make sure to replace it with the correct Message-ID for your +previous cover letter - that is, if you’re sending v2, use the Message-ID +from v1; if you’re sending v3, use the Message-ID from v2.

+
+
+

While you’re looking at the email, you should also note who is CC’d, as it’s +common practice in the mailing list to keep all CCs on a thread. You can add +these CC lines directly to your cover letter with a line like so in the header +(before the Subject line):

+
+
+
+
CC: author@example.com, Othe R <other@example.com>
+
+
+
+

Now send the emails again, paying close attention to which messages you pass in +to the command:

+
+
+
+
$ git send-email --to=target@example.com
+                 --in-reply-to="<foo.12345.author@example.com>"
+                 psuh/v2-*.patch
+
+
+
+
+

Bonus Chapter: One-Patch Changes

+
+

In some cases, your very small change may consist of only one patch. When that +happens, you only need to send one email. Your commit message should already be +meaningful and explain at a high level the purpose (what is happening and why) +of your patch, but if you need to supply even more context, you can do so below +the --- in your patch. Take the example below, which was generated with git +format-patch on a single commit, and then edited to add the content between +the --- and the diffstat.

+
+
+
+
From 1345bbb3f7ac74abde040c12e737204689a72723 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
+From: A U Thor <author@example.com>
+Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2019 15:11:02 -0700
+Subject: [PATCH] README: change the grammar
+
+I think it looks better this way. This part of the commit message will
+end up in the commit-log.
+
+Signed-off-by: A U Thor <author@example.com>
+---
+Let's have a wild discussion about grammar on the mailing list. This
+part of my email will never end up in the commit log. Here is where I
+can add additional context to the mailing list about my intent, outside
+of the context of the commit log. This section was added after `git
+format-patch` was run, by editing the patch file in a text editor.
+
+ README.md | 2 +-
+ 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
+
+diff --git a/README.md b/README.md
+index 88f126184c..38da593a60 100644
+--- a/README.md
++++ b/README.md
+@@ -3,7 +3,7 @@
+ Git - fast, scalable, distributed revision control system
+ =========================================================
+
+-Git is a fast, scalable, distributed revision control system with an
++Git is a fast, scalable, and distributed revision control system with an
+ unusually rich command set that provides both high-level operations
+ and full access to internals.
+
+--
+2.21.0.392.gf8f6787159e-goog
+
+
+
+
+
+
+

My Patch Got Emailed - Now What?

+
+
+

Please give reviewers enough time to process your initial patch before +sending an updated version. That is, resist the temptation to send a new +version immediately, because others may have already started reviewing +your initial version.

+
+
+

While waiting for review comments, you may find mistakes in your initial +patch, or perhaps realize a different and better way to achieve the goal +of the patch. In this case you may communicate your findings to other +reviewers as follows:

+
+
+
    +
  • +

    If the mistakes you found are minor, send a reply to your patch as if +you were a reviewer and mention that you will fix them in an +updated version.

    +
    • +
  • +

    On the other hand, if you think you want to change the course so +drastically that reviews on the initial patch would be a waste of +time (for everyone involved), retract the patch immediately with +a reply like "I am working on a much better approach, so please +ignore this patch and wait for the updated version."

    +
    • +
+
+
+

Now, the above is a good practice if you sent your initial patch +prematurely without polish. But a better approach of course is to avoid +sending your patch prematurely in the first place.

+
+
+

Please be considerate of the time needed by reviewers to examine each +new version of your patch. Rather than seeing the initial version right +now (followed by several "oops, I like this version better than the +previous one" patches over 2 days), reviewers would strongly prefer if a +single polished version came 2 days later instead, and that version with +fewer mistakes were the only one they would need to review.

+
+
+

Responding to Reviews

+
+

After a few days, you will hopefully receive a reply to your patchset with some +comments. Woohoo! Now you can get back to work.

+
+
+

It’s good manners to reply to each comment, notifying the reviewer that you have +made the change suggested, feel the original is better, or that the comment +inspired you to do something a new way which is superior to both the original +and the suggested change. This way reviewers don’t need to inspect your v2 to +figure out whether you implemented their comment or not.

+
+
+

Reviewers may ask you about what you wrote in the patchset, either in +the proposed commit log message or in the changes themselves. You +should answer these questions in your response messages, but often the +reason why reviewers asked these questions to understand what you meant +to write is because your patchset needed clarification to be understood.

+
+
+

Do not be satisfied by just answering their questions in your response +and hear them say that they now understand what you wanted to say. +Update your patches to clarify the points reviewers had trouble with, +and prepare your v2; the words you used to explain your v1 to answer +reviewers' questions may be useful thing to use. Your goal is to make +your v2 clear enough so that it becomes unnecessary for you to give the +same explanation to the next person who reads it.

+
+
+

If you are going to push back on a comment, be polite and explain why you feel +your original is better; be prepared that the reviewer may still disagree with +you, and the rest of the community may weigh in on one side or the other. As +with all code reviews, it’s important to keep an open mind to doing something a +different way than you originally planned; other reviewers have a different +perspective on the project than you do, and may be thinking of a valid side +effect which had not occurred to you. It is always okay to ask for clarification +if you aren’t sure why a change was suggested, or what the reviewer is asking +you to do.

+
+
+

Make sure your email client has a plaintext email mode and it is turned on; the +Git list rejects HTML email. Please also follow the mailing list etiquette +outlined in the +Maintainer’s +Note, which are similar to etiquette rules in most open source communities +surrounding bottom-posting and inline replies.

+
+
+

When you’re making changes to your code, it is cleanest - that is, the resulting +commits are easiest to look at - if you use git rebase -i (interactive +rebase). Take a look at this +overview +from O’Reilly. The general idea is to modify each commit which requires changes; +this way, instead of having a patch A with a mistake, a patch B which was fine +and required no upstream reviews in v1, and a patch C which fixes patch A for +v2, you can just ship a v2 with a correct patch A and correct patch B. This is +changing history, but since it’s local history which you haven’t shared with +anyone, that is okay for now! (Later, it may not make sense to do this; take a +look at the section below this one for some context.)

+
+
+
+

After Review Approval

+
+

The Git project has four integration branches: seen, next, master, and +maint. Your change will be placed into seen fairly early on by the maintainer +while it is still in the review process; from there, when it is ready for wider +testing, it will be merged into next. Plenty of early testers use next and +may report issues. Eventually, changes in next will make it to master, +which is typically considered stable. Finally, when a new release is cut, +maint is used to base bugfixes onto. As mentioned at the beginning of this +document, you can read Documents/SubmittingPatches for some more info about +the use of the various integration branches.

+
+
+

Back to now: your code has been lauded by the upstream reviewers. It is perfect. +It is ready to be accepted. You don’t need to do anything else; the maintainer +will merge your topic branch to next and life is good.

+
+
+

However, if you discover it isn’t so perfect after this point, you may need to +take some special steps depending on where you are in the process.

+
+
+

If the maintainer has announced in the "What’s cooking in git.git" email that +your topic is marked for next - that is, that they plan to merge it to next +but have not yet done so - you should send an email asking the maintainer to +wait a little longer: "I’ve sent v4 of my series and you marked it for next, +but I need to change this and that - please wait for v5 before you merge it."

+
+
+

If the topic has already been merged to next, rather than modifying your +patches with git rebase -i, you should make further changes incrementally - +that is, with another commit, based on top of the maintainer’s topic branch as +detailed in https://github.com/gitster/git. Your work is still in the same topic +but is now incremental, rather than a wholesale rewrite of the topic branch.

+
+
+

The topic branches in the maintainer’s GitHub are mirrored in GitGitGadget, so +if you’re sending your reviews out that way, you should be sure to open your PR +against the appropriate GitGitGadget/Git branch.

+
+
+

If you’re using git send-email, you can use it the same way as before, but you +should generate your diffs from <topic>..<mybranch> and base your work on +<topic> instead of master.

+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+1. Scripts under `contrib/` are not part of the core `git` binary and must be called directly. Clone the Git codebase and run `perl contrib/contacts/git-contacts`. +
+
+ + + \ No newline at end of file