Moving to GitHub: Status Update, Action Required

Clemens Lang cal at
Mon Oct 24 10:58:41 PDT 2016

On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 07:47:18PM +0200, Mojca Miklavec wrote:
> I can send you a screenshot comparing the version I opened two hours
> ago and the same page reloaded just now. The result changed in the
> meantime. In any case I can no longer provide you any broken example
> (there are still some for other developers, but I cannot judge about
> whether other developers did the migration already or not).

So that's probably because the conversion does not happen instantly, but
is processed in a delayed cronjob and wasn't finished when you initially
looked at it.

> The problem I have right now though is how to list the tickets owned /
> reported by me. The query I used on the old trac no longer works.
> For example:
> [[TicketQuery(status=assigned|new|reopened&owner~=mojca at]]

Use your GitHub username as owner instead of the email address.

> The idea is not to play with it on my own. I know how trivial git
> commands work. What is not yet clear to me is whether we would be
> clicking the gui buttons to accept pull requests or do some
> non-conventional steps of merging multiple commits, adding our changes
> on top, rebasing to master etc.

I would leave that up to the developers. Previously, GitHub did not
support rebasing pull requests, but that was fixed a while ago, so now
you can also merge PRs by rebasing them on top of master.

I don't think we should mandate a complex "run these magic git commands"
workflow. Making things complicated will just make them go wrong.

> (My preference would be to keep linear history for master and not to
> keep ten broken revisions of a Portfile resulting from stepwise
> improvements in a pull request, but it would be nice to do some
> testing first.)

Yes, that's also my preference. So we can agree on:
 - rebase when merging PRs
 - rewrite history on PR branches until it looks good


More information about the macports-dev mailing list