From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: =?utf-8?B?VG9tw6HFoSDEjGVjaA==?= Subject: Re: none Date: Sat, 23 Jul 2016 09:03:24 +0200 Message-ID: <20160723070324.uuyyuiznnxfxxx2k@venom> References: <579027b7.VHXjhpPxQC3AAmeY%pjotr.public12@email> <8760rznoh1.fsf@gnu.org> <20160722004130.GA10340@thebird.nl> <87k2gexf4l.fsf@gnu.org> <87twfhirc5.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="4cb3y5f7qnjn5t5z" Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:37062) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bQqyC-0005FL-Rp for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 23 Jul 2016 03:03:33 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bQqy8-0004qi-Mt for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 23 Jul 2016 03:03:31 -0400 Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:49320) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bQqy8-0004qT-Fe for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 23 Jul 2016 03:03:28 -0400 Received: from relay2.suse.de (charybdis-ext.suse.de [195.135.220.254]) by mx2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A0D9AAEF for ; Sat, 23 Jul 2016 07:03:25 +0000 (UTC) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" To: guix-devel@gnu.org --4cb3y5f7qnjn5t5z Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 12:38:44PM -0400, myglc2 wrote: >ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic Court=E8s) writes: > >> Hi Roel, >> >> Roel Janssen skribis: >> >[...] >> >>> One thing that really helped me in reducing the time to contribute >>> changes to the upstream distribution, is to have a good workflow. I >>> ended up doing the following: >>> 1. Make the changes. >>> 2. Commit the changes. >>> 3 git format-patch -1 --no-attach >>> 4. git reset --hard >>> 5. Submit the patch to the mailing list >>> 6. Wait for response and probably go back to 1. >>> >>> I made all of my changes on a GNU Guix git checkout. So, not writing >>> package definitions on a separate repository. >> >> Do you think it would help to add this as a section in the manual? > >This is a great idea! This reminds me: https://cdn.meme.am/instances/500x/69604641.jpg I ended with using topic branches or queues instead, all on top of master. wip - not yet finished changes review - sent to ML and waiting for review lvm, kernel, ... - branches with some topic changes cherry-picking from wip to review and sending from there as described above. `git pull --rebase' will identify when they have been merged. S_W --4cb3y5f7qnjn5t5z Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJXkxaoAAoJEEoj40+gM0NtIcwQAIXmn+/1o0/QTBzLFJZlSLTD 11opSsqmtnOBMfxKgeNpAgvxWTFbn893SmilybTL5vrdM/pvAzSajtVqeVrnM7Xs 7XFfw25HF0tyVeOI8Bluy4svuYaa7alvroTTfg8KHxvD8dXxO1pRDUJjQNCQIgBp Zp7gZkSYWwfx7QDN88ZdhclrpdfYa9Gfz+DbJ9eMCzaii3ntxtvssTfqFsNBO5Mh m9Mh782b3RftUHSqNA4wSRgu/+fbQfKNYBHOr2rZmY1EN5mHRE4YpztyENE3sgIy bLZ2N9J5OSWA2zk8uMB6qOts6WC+YXI0NL5ONQYpGwccWlDjrEZusjlKsPIAvO1G nrQql/Ke+ZwduvTF7NkU8Z23DYKRlrdSpni3NEfcxGgGE+59hkQsFt+oz6IFSXMd ShOzNcIw69R1j0UK9ll7p5ZrTVVcrHptLR1PIVHtv/pHJ7N1kWLzwmUtZEOrugaF n0mkAs+qhnVGRq8kmCMwTfapg3FDZO9zvbiYiNxzy+7J/AGrSQPKhhOlpWOgm6id DpXtbPNm3XqOv1YXVTUwb4Uf7Bvpfqk/pmpUx2CLc0vzMsYAFkQcCQj/JEQ7gpXn 7WoD/JOhZgNI1xE1YJy1obEvxzfHtDOtxGfdubZFVD00iNgKYayPyqEvAYE2n0YZ zK6KGYHbRxN0ANDBCShz =0kPz -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --4cb3y5f7qnjn5t5z--