| 1 |
Dear users of the sci overlay, |
| 2 |
we've recently rearranged the git setup. The current sci setup is now |
| 3 |
exactly like the main tree setup, namely: |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
1. The authoritative repo is the one hosted by infra |
| 6 |
(git://anongit.gentoo.org/proj/sci.git) |
| 7 |
2. All commits to the sci repo will be synced over to Github |
| 8 |
automatically, in ONE DIRECTION only. This means all the dual HEAD |
| 9 |
merging is obsolete now. |
| 10 |
3. The Github repo is now meant as a (friendly) interface to potential |
| 11 |
contributors. |
| 12 |
4. As a new QA policy, merge commits in the overlay are banned now. The |
| 13 |
sci overlay has much lower contention than the main repository, such |
| 14 |
that you can realistically always avoid merge commits, even for large |
| 15 |
batches of commits. This will require you to rebase your commits on top |
| 16 |
of remote: |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
git pull --rebase=preserve |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
I will likely further tighten the QA standards of the repository, due |
| 21 |
to a history of poor COMMITMSGs and other QA violations. This is |
| 22 |
supposed to be a testing ground for the main repo, where plans are to |
| 23 |
also introduce such QA measures. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
Furthermore, I am considering requiring full GPG-signed commits for the |
| 26 |
overlay, and for this I would like to get some input. I believe this |
| 27 |
prepares contributors for eventually joining Gentoo. For low-volume |
| 28 |
contributors not wanting to join, we can always merge pull requests |
| 29 |
from Github. Ideas? Are you opposed to this? |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
Regards |
| 32 |
David |
Archives