|
|
|
Subject: A note from the maintainer
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Welcome to the Git development community.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This message is written by the maintainer and talks about how Git
|
|
|
|
project is managed, and how you can work with it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* Mailing list and the community
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The development is primarily done on the Git mailing list. Help
|
|
|
|
requests, feature proposals, bug reports and patches should be sent to
|
|
|
|
the list address <git@vger.kernel.org>. You don't have to be
|
|
|
|
subscribed to send messages. The convention on the list is to keep
|
|
|
|
everybody involved on Cc:, so it is unnecessary to say "Please Cc: me,
|
|
|
|
I am not subscribed".
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Before sending patches, please read Documentation/SubmittingPatches
|
|
|
|
and Documentation/CodingGuidelines to familiarize yourself with the
|
|
|
|
project convention.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If you sent a patch and you did not hear any response from anybody for
|
|
|
|
several days, it could be that your patch was totally uninteresting,
|
|
|
|
but it also is possible that it was simply lost in the noise. Please
|
|
|
|
do not hesitate to send a reminder message in such a case. Messages
|
|
|
|
getting lost in the noise may be a sign that those who can evaluate
|
|
|
|
your patch don't have enough mental/time bandwidth to process them
|
|
|
|
right at the moment, and it often helps to wait until the list traffic
|
|
|
|
becomes calmer before sending such a reminder.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The list archive is available at a few public sites:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/
|
|
|
|
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=git
|
|
|
|
http://www.spinics.net/lists/git/
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For those who prefer to read it over NNTP:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
When you point at a message in a mailing list archive, using
|
|
|
|
gmane is often the easiest to follow by readers, like this:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/27/focus=217
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
as it also allows people who subscribe to the mailing list as gmane
|
|
|
|
newsgroup to "jump to" the article.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Some members of the development community can sometimes be found on
|
|
|
|
the #git and #git-devel IRC channels on Freenode. Their logs are
|
|
|
|
available at:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
http://colabti.org/irclogger/irclogger_log/git
|
|
|
|
http://colabti.org/irclogger/irclogger_log/git-devel
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Git is a member project of software freedom conservancy, a non-profit
|
|
|
|
organization (https://sfconservancy.org/). To reach a committee of
|
|
|
|
liaisons to the conservancy, contact them at <git@sfconservancy.org>.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* Reporting bugs
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
When you think git does not behave as you expect, please do not stop
|
|
|
|
your bug report with just "git does not work". "I used git in this
|
|
|
|
way, but it did not work" is not much better, neither is "I used git
|
|
|
|
in this way, and X happend, which is broken". It often is that git is
|
|
|
|
correct to cause X happen in such a case, and it is your expectation
|
|
|
|
that is broken. People would not know what other result Y you expected
|
|
|
|
to see instead of X, if you left it unsaid.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Please remember to always state
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- what you wanted to achieve;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- what you did (the version of git and the command sequence to reproduce
|
|
|
|
the behavior);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- what you saw happen (X above);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- what you expected to see (Y above); and
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- how the last two are different.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/bugs.html for further
|
|
|
|
hints.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If you think you found a security-sensitive issue and want to disclose
|
|
|
|
it to us without announcing it to wider public, please contact us at
|
|
|
|
our security mailing list <git-security@googlegroups.com>.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* Repositories, branches and documentation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
My public git.git repositories are at:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/git/git.git/
|
|
|
|
https://kernel.googlesource.com/pub/scm/git/git
|
|
|
|
git://repo.or.cz/alt-git.git/
|
|
|
|
https://github.com/git/git/
|
|
|
|
https://code.google.com/p/git-core/
|
|
|
|
git://git.sourceforge.jp/gitroot/git-core/git.git/
|
|
|
|
git://git-core.git.sourceforge.net/gitroot/git-core/git-core/
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A few web interfaces are found at:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
http://git.kernel.org/?p=git/git.git
|
|
|
|
https://kernel.googlesource.com/pub/scm/git/git
|
|
|
|
http://repo.or.cz/w/alt-git.git
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preformatted documentation from the tip of the "master" branch can be
|
|
|
|
found in:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/git/git-{htmldocs,manpages}.git/
|
|
|
|
git://repo.or.cz/git-{htmldocs,manpages}.git/
|
|
|
|
https://code.google.com/p/git-{htmldocs,manpages}.git/
|
|
|
|
https://github.com/gitster/git-{htmldocs,manpages}.git/
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You can browse the HTML manual pages at:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
http://git-htmldocs.googlecode.com/git/git.html
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There are four branches in git.git repository that track the source tree
|
|
|
|
of git: "master", "maint", "next", and "pu".
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The "master" branch is meant to contain what are very well tested and
|
|
|
|
ready to be used in a production setting. Every now and then, a
|
|
|
|
"feature release" is cut from the tip of this branch. They used to be
|
|
|
|
named with three dotted decimal digits (e.g. "1.8.5"), but recently we
|
|
|
|
switched the versioning scheme and "feature releases" are named with
|
|
|
|
three-dotted decimal digits that ends with ".0" (e.g. "1.9.0").
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The last such release was 2.3.0 done on Feb 5th, 2015. You can expect
|
|
|
|
that the tip of the "master" branch is always more stable than any of
|
|
|
|
the released versions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Whenever a feature release is made, "maint" branch is forked off from
|
|
|
|
"master" at that point. Obvious, safe and urgent fixes after a
|
|
|
|
feature release are applied to this branch and maintenance releases
|
|
|
|
are cut from it. The maintenance releases used to be named with four
|
|
|
|
dotted decimal, named after the feature release they are updates to
|
|
|
|
(e.g. "1.8.5.1" was the first maintenance release for "1.8.5" feature
|
|
|
|
release). These days, maintenance releases are named by incrementing
|
|
|
|
the last digit of three-dotted decimal name (e.g. "2.3.2" is the
|
|
|
|
second maintenance relaese for "2.3" series).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
New features never go to the 'maint' branch. This branch is also
|
|
|
|
merged into "master" to propagate the fixes forward as needed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A new development does not usually happen on "master". When you send a
|
|
|
|
series of patches, after review on the mailing list, a separate topic
|
|
|
|
branch is forked from the tip of "master" and your patches are queued
|
|
|
|
there, and kept out of "master" while people test it out. The quality of
|
|
|
|
topic branches are judged primarily by the mailing list discussions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic branches that are in good shape are merged to the "next" branch. In
|
|
|
|
general, the "next" branch always contains the tip of "master". It might
|
|
|
|
not be quite rock-solid, but is expected to work more or less without major
|
|
|
|
breakage. The "next" branch is where new and exciting things take place. A
|
|
|
|
topic that is in "next" is expected to be polished to perfection before it
|
|
|
|
is merged to "master".
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The "pu" (proposed updates) branch bundles all the remaining topic
|
|
|
|
branches the maintainer happens to have. There is no guarantee that
|
|
|
|
the maintainer has enough bandwidth to pick up any and all topics that
|
|
|
|
are remotely promising from the list traffic, so please do not read
|
|
|
|
too much into a topic being on (or not on) the "pu" branch. This
|
|
|
|
branch is mainly to remind the maintainer that the topics in them may
|
|
|
|
turn out to be interesting when they are polished, nothing more. The
|
|
|
|
topics on this branch aren't usually complete, well tested, or well
|
|
|
|
documented and they often need further work. When a topic that was
|
|
|
|
in "pu" proves to be in a testable shape, it is merged to "next".
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You can run "git log --first-parent master..pu" to see what topics are
|
|
|
|
currently in flight. Sometimes, an idea that looked promising turns out
|
|
|
|
to be not so good and the topic can be dropped from "pu" in such a case.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The two branches "master" and "maint" are never rewound, and "next"
|
|
|
|
usually will not be either. After a feature release is made from
|
|
|
|
"master", however, "next" will be rebuilt from the tip of "master"
|
|
|
|
using the topics that didn't make the cut in the feature release.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Note that being in "next" is not a guarantee to appear in the next
|
|
|
|
release, nor even in any future release. There were cases that topics
|
|
|
|
needed reverting a few commits in them before graduating to "master",
|
|
|
|
or a topic that already was in "next" was reverted from "next" because
|
|
|
|
fatal flaws were found in it after it was merged to "next".
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* Other people's trees, trusted lieutenants and credits.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Documentation/SubmittingPatches outlines to whom your proposed changes
|
|
|
|
should be sent. As described in contrib/README, I would delegate fixes
|
|
|
|
and enhancements in contrib/ area to the primary contributors of them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Although the following are included in git.git repository, they have their
|
|
|
|
own authoritative repository and maintainers:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- git-gui/ comes from git-gui project, maintained by Pat Thoyts:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
git://repo.or.cz/git-gui.git
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- gitk-git/ comes from Paul Mackerras's gitk project:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
git://ozlabs.org/~paulus/gitk
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- po/ comes from the localization coordinator, Jiang Xin:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
https://github.com/git-l10n/git-po/
|
|
|
|
|