Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [cdt-dev] CDT and GitHub (was: RE: Unit testing support for Eclipse CDT)

> -----Original Message-----
> From: cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx 
> [mailto:cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Andrew Overholt
> Sent: Wednesday, August 31, 2011 3:55 PM
> To: Schaefer, Doug
> Cc: CDT General developers list.
> Subject: Re: [cdt-dev] CDT and GitHub (was: RE: Unit testing 
> support for Eclipse CDT)
> * Schaefer, Doug <Doug.Schaefer@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> [2011-08-31 11:54]:
> > So, Andrew, are saying is that on a fetch (from the github repo in
> > this case to the local repo from which I'll push to 
> after
> > the merge), all the new commit records get updated so that the
> > Committer field is set to the name of the person doing the fetch?
> Here's a concrete example from Linux Tools that may help.  The bug:
>   Create unit tests for Helgrind
> The contributor's GitHub commit (referenced in the bug):
> 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?

> I fetched from there and pushed into Linux Tools, resulting in:
> /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.
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?

Maybe I'm mis-understanding something....

> HTH,
> Andrew
> _______________________________________________
> cdt-dev mailing list
> cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx

Back to the top