summaryrefslogtreecommitdiffstats
path: root/Documentation/MyFirstContribution.txt
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
Diffstat (limited to 'Documentation/MyFirstContribution.txt')
-rw-r--r--Documentation/MyFirstContribution.txt1352
1 files changed, 1352 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/Documentation/MyFirstContribution.txt b/Documentation/MyFirstContribution.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..ccfd0cb
--- /dev/null
+++ b/Documentation/MyFirstContribution.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,1352 @@
+My First Contribution to the Git Project
+========================================
+:sectanchors:
+
+[[summary]]
+== Summary
+
+This is a tutorial demonstrating the end-to-end workflow of creating a change to
+the Git tree, sending it for review, and making changes based on comments.
+
+[[prerequisites]]
+=== Prerequisites
+
+This tutorial assumes you're already fairly familiar with using Git to manage
+source code. The Git workflow steps will largely remain unexplained.
+
+[[related-reading]]
+=== Related Reading
+
+This tutorial aims to summarize the following documents, but the reader may find
+useful additional context:
+
+- `Documentation/SubmittingPatches`
+- `Documentation/howto/new-command.txt`
+
+[[getting-help]]
+=== Getting Help
+
+If you get stuck, you can seek help in the following places.
+
+==== git@vger.kernel.org
+
+This is the main Git project mailing list where code reviews, version
+announcements, design discussions, and more take place. Those interested in
+contributing are welcome to post questions here. The Git list requires
+plain-text-only emails and prefers inline and bottom-posting when replying to
+mail; you will be CC'd in all replies to you. Optionally, you can subscribe to
+the list by sending an email to majordomo@vger.kernel.org with "subscribe git"
+in the body. The https://lore.kernel.org/git[archive] of this mailing list is
+available to view in a browser.
+
+==== https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/git-mentoring[git-mentoring@googlegroups.com]
+
+This mailing list is targeted to new contributors and was created as a place to
+post questions and receive answers outside of the public eye of the main list.
+Veteran contributors who are especially interested in helping mentor newcomers
+are present on the list. In order to avoid search indexers, group membership is
+required to view messages; anyone can join and no approval is required.
+
+==== https://web.libera.chat/#git-devel[#git-devel] on Libera Chat
+
+This IRC channel is for conversations between Git contributors. If someone is
+currently online and knows the answer to your question, you can receive help
+in real time. Otherwise, you can read the
+https://colabti.org/irclogger/irclogger_logs/git-devel[scrollback] to see
+whether someone answered you. IRC does not allow offline private messaging, so
+if you try to private message someone and then log out of IRC, they cannot
+respond to you. It's better to ask your questions in the channel so that you
+can be answered if you disconnect and so that others can learn from the
+conversation.
+
+[[getting-started]]
+== Getting Started
+
+[[cloning]]
+=== Clone the Git Repository
+
+Git is mirrored in a number of locations. Clone the repository from one of them;
+https://git-scm.com/downloads suggests one of the best places to clone from is
+the mirror on GitHub.
+
+----
+$ git clone https://github.com/git/git git
+$ cd git
+----
+
+[[dependencies]]
+=== Installing Dependencies
+
+To build Git from source, you need to have a handful of dependencies installed
+on your system. For a hint of what's needed, you can take a look at
+`INSTALL`, paying close attention to the section about Git's dependencies on
+external programs and libraries. That document mentions a way to "test-drive"
+our freshly built Git without installing; that's the method we'll be using in
+this tutorial.
+
+Make sure that your environment has everything you need by building your brand
+new clone of Git from the above step:
+
+----
+$ make
+----
+
+NOTE: The Git build is parallelizable. `-j#` is not included above but you can
+use it as you prefer, here and elsewhere.
+
+[[identify-problem]]
+=== Identify Problem to Solve
+
+////
+Use + to indicate fixed-width here; couldn't get ` to work nicely with the
+quotes around "Pony Saying 'Um, Hello'".
+////
+In this tutorial, we will add a new command, +git psuh+, short for ``Pony Saying
+`Um, Hello''' - a feature which has gone unimplemented despite a high frequency
+of invocation during users' typical daily workflow.
+
+(We've seen some other effort in this space with the implementation of popular
+commands such as `sl`.)
+
+[[setup-workspace]]
+=== Set Up Your Workspace
+
+Let's start by making a development branch to work on our changes. Per
+`Documentation/SubmittingPatches`, since a brand new command is a new feature,
+it's fine to base your work on `master`. However, in the future for bugfixes,
+etc., you should check that document and base it on the appropriate branch.
+
+For the purposes of this document, we will base all our work on the `master`
+branch of the upstream project. Create the `psuh` branch you will use for
+development like so:
+
+----
+$ git checkout -b psuh origin/master
+----
+
+We'll make a number of commits here in order to demonstrate how to send a topic
+with multiple patches up for review simultaneously.
+
+[[code-it-up]]
+== Code It Up!
+
+NOTE: A reference implementation can be found at
+https://github.com/nasamuffin/git/tree/psuh.
+
+[[add-new-command]]
+=== Adding a New Command
+
+Lots of the subcommands are written as builtins, which means they are
+implemented in C and compiled into the main `git` executable. Implementing the
+very simple `psuh` command as a built-in will demonstrate the structure of the
+codebase, the internal API, and the process of working together as a contributor
+with the reviewers and maintainer to integrate this change into the system.
+
+Built-in subcommands are typically implemented in a function named "cmd_"
+followed by the name of the subcommand, in a source file named after the
+subcommand and contained within `builtin/`. So it makes sense to implement your
+command in `builtin/psuh.c`. Create that file, and within it, write the entry
+point for your command in a function matching the style and signature:
+
+----
+int cmd_psuh(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix)
+----
+
+We'll also need to add the declaration of psuh; open up `builtin.h`, find the
+declaration for `cmd_pull`, and add a new line for `psuh` immediately before it,
+in order to keep the declarations alphabetically sorted:
+
+----
+int cmd_psuh(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix);
+----
+
+Be sure to `#include "builtin.h"` in your `psuh.c`.
+
+Go ahead and add some throwaway printf to that function. This is a decent
+starting point as we can now add build rules and register the command.
+
+NOTE: Your throwaway text, as well as much of the text you will be adding over
+the course of this tutorial, is user-facing. That means it needs to be
+localizable. Take a look at `po/README` under "Marking strings for translation".
+Throughout the tutorial, we will mark strings for translation as necessary; you
+should also do so when writing your user-facing commands in the future.
+
+----
+int cmd_psuh(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix)
+{
+ printf(_("Pony saying hello goes here.\n"));
+ return 0;
+}
+----
+
+Let's try to build it. Open `Makefile`, find where `builtin/pull.o` is added
+to `BUILTIN_OBJS`, and add `builtin/psuh.o` in the same way next to it in
+alphabetical order. Once you've done so, move to the top-level directory and
+build simply with `make`. Also add the `DEVELOPER=1` variable to turn on
+some additional warnings:
+
+----
+$ echo DEVELOPER=1 >config.mak
+$ make
+----
+
+NOTE: When you are developing the Git project, it's preferred that you use the
+`DEVELOPER` flag; if there's some reason it doesn't work for you, you can turn
+it off, but it's a good idea to mention the problem to the mailing list.
+
+Great, now your new command builds happily on its own. But nobody invokes it.
+Let's change that.
+
+The list of commands lives in `git.c`. We can register a new command by adding
+a `cmd_struct` to the `commands[]` array. `struct cmd_struct` takes a string
+with the command name, a function pointer to the command implementation, and a
+setup option flag. For now, let's keep mimicking `push`. Find the line where
+`cmd_push` is registered, copy it, and modify it for `cmd_psuh`, placing the new
+line in alphabetical order (immediately before `cmd_pull`).
+
+The options are documented in `builtin.h` under "Adding a new built-in." Since
+we hope to print some data about the user's current workspace context later,
+we need a Git directory, so choose `RUN_SETUP` as your only option.
+
+Go ahead and build again. You should see a clean build, so let's kick the tires
+and see if it works. There's a binary you can use to test with in the
+`bin-wrappers` directory.
+
+----
+$ ./bin-wrappers/git psuh
+----
+
+Check it out! You've got a command! Nice work! Let's commit this.
+
+`git status` reveals modified `Makefile`, `builtin.h`, and `git.c` as well as
+untracked `builtin/psuh.c` and `git-psuh`. First, let's take care of the binary,
+which should be ignored. Open `.gitignore` in your editor, find `/git-pull`, and
+add an entry for your new command in alphabetical order:
+
+----
+...
+/git-prune-packed
+/git-psuh
+/git-pull
+/git-push
+/git-quiltimport
+/git-range-diff
+...
+----
+
+Checking `git status` again should show that `git-psuh` has been removed from
+the untracked list and `.gitignore` has been added to the modified list. Now we
+can stage and commit:
+
+----
+$ git add Makefile builtin.h builtin/psuh.c git.c .gitignore
+$ git commit -s
+----
+
+You will be presented with your editor in order to write a commit message. Start
+the commit with a 50-column or less subject line, including the name of the
+component you're working on, followed by a blank line (always required) and then
+the body of your commit message, which should provide the bulk of the context.
+Remember to be explicit and provide the "Why" of your change, especially if it
+couldn't easily be understood from your diff. When editing your commit message,
+don't remove the `Signed-off-by` trailer which was added by `-s` above.
+
+----
+psuh: add a built-in by popular demand
+
+Internal metrics indicate this is a command many users expect to be
+present. So here's an implementation to help drive customer
+satisfaction and engagement: a pony which doubtfully greets the user,
+or, a Pony Saying "Um, Hello" (PSUH).
+
+This commit message is intentionally formatted to 72 columns per line,
+starts with a single line as "commit message subject" that is written as
+if to command the codebase to do something (add this, teach a command
+that). The body of the message is designed to add information about the
+commit that is not readily deduced from reading the associated diff,
+such as answering the question "why?".
+
+Signed-off-by: A U Thor <author@example.com>
+----
+
+Go ahead and inspect your new commit with `git show`. "psuh:" indicates you
+have modified mainly the `psuh` command. The subject line gives readers an idea
+of what you've changed. The sign-off line (`-s`) indicates that you agree to
+the Developer's Certificate of Origin 1.1 (see the
+`Documentation/SubmittingPatches` +++[[dco]]+++ header).
+
+For the remainder of the tutorial, the subject line only will be listed for the
+sake of brevity. However, fully-fleshed example commit messages are available
+on the reference implementation linked at the top of this document.
+
+[[implementation]]
+=== Implementation
+
+It's probably useful to do at least something besides printing out a string.
+Let's start by having a look at everything we get.
+
+Modify your `cmd_psuh` implementation to dump the args you're passed, keeping
+existing `printf()` calls in place:
+
+----
+ int i;
+
+ ...
+
+ printf(Q_("Your args (there is %d):\n",
+ "Your args (there are %d):\n",
+ argc),
+ argc);
+ for (i = 0; i < argc; i++)
+ printf("%d: %s\n", i, argv[i]);
+
+ printf(_("Your current working directory:\n<top-level>%s%s\n"),
+ prefix ? "/" : "", prefix ? prefix : "");
+
+----
+
+Build and try it. As you may expect, there's pretty much just whatever we give
+on the command line, including the name of our command. (If `prefix` is empty
+for you, try `cd Documentation/ && ../bin-wrappers/git psuh`). That's not so
+helpful. So what other context can we get?
+
+Add a line to `#include "config.h"`. Then, add the following bits to the
+function body:
+
+----
+ const char *cfg_name;
+
+...
+
+ git_config(git_default_config, NULL);
+ if (git_config_get_string_tmp("user.name", &cfg_name) > 0)
+ printf(_("No name is found in config\n"));
+ else
+ printf(_("Your name: %s\n"), cfg_name);
+----
+
+`git_config()` will grab the configuration from config files known to Git and
+apply standard precedence rules. `git_config_get_string_tmp()` will look up
+a specific key ("user.name") and give you the value. There are a number of
+single-key lookup functions like this one; you can see them all (and more info
+about how to use `git_config()`) in `Documentation/technical/api-config.txt`.
+
+You should see that the name printed matches the one you see when you run:
+
+----
+$ git config --get user.name
+----
+
+Great! Now we know how to check for values in the Git config. Let's commit this
+too, so we don't lose our progress.
+
+----
+$ git add builtin/psuh.c
+$ git commit -sm "psuh: show parameters & config opts"
+----
+
+NOTE: Again, the above is for sake of brevity in this tutorial. In a real change
+you should not use `-m` but instead use the editor to write a meaningful
+message.
+
+Still, it'd be nice to know what the user's working context is like. Let's see
+if we can print the name of the user's current branch. We can mimic the
+`git status` implementation; the printer is located in `wt-status.c` and we can
+see that the branch is held in a `struct wt_status`.
+
+`wt_status_print()` gets invoked by `cmd_status()` in `builtin/commit.c`.
+Looking at that implementation we see the status config being populated like so:
+
+----
+status_init_config(&s, git_status_config);
+----
+
+But as we drill down, we can find that `status_init_config()` wraps a call
+to `git_config()`. Let's modify the code we wrote in the previous commit.
+
+Be sure to include the header to allow you to use `struct wt_status`:
+----
+#include "wt-status.h"
+----
+
+Then modify your `cmd_psuh` implementation to declare your `struct wt_status`,
+prepare it, and print its contents:
+
+----
+ struct wt_status status;
+
+...
+
+ wt_status_prepare(the_repository, &status);
+ git_config(git_default_config, &status);
+
+...
+
+ printf(_("Your current branch: %s\n"), status.branch);
+----
+
+Run it again. Check it out - here's the (verbose) name of your current branch!
+
+Let's commit this as well.
+
+----
+$ git add builtin/psuh.c
+$ git commit -sm "psuh: print the current branch"
+----
+
+Now let's see if we can get some info about a specific commit.
+
+Luckily, there are some helpers for us here. `commit.h` has a function called
+`lookup_commit_reference_by_name` to which we can simply provide a hardcoded
+string; `pretty.h` has an extremely handy `pp_commit_easy()` call which doesn't
+require a full format object to be passed.
+
+Add the following includes:
+
+----
+#include "commit.h"
+#include "pretty.h"
+----
+
+Then, add the following lines within your implementation of `cmd_psuh()` near
+the declarations and the logic, respectively.
+
+----
+ struct commit *c = NULL;
+ struct strbuf commitline = STRBUF_INIT;
+
+...
+
+ c = lookup_commit_reference_by_name("origin/master");
+
+ if (c != NULL) {
+ pp_commit_easy(CMIT_FMT_ONELINE, c, &commitline);
+ printf(_("Current commit: %s\n"), commitline.buf);
+ }
+----
+
+The `struct strbuf` provides some safety belts to your basic `char*`, one of
+which is a length member to prevent buffer overruns. It needs to be initialized
+nicely with `STRBUF_INIT`. Keep it in mind when you need to pass around `char*`.
+
+`lookup_commit_reference_by_name` resolves the name you pass it, so you can play
+with the value there and see what kind of things you can come up with.
+
+`pp_commit_easy` is a convenience wrapper in `pretty.h` that takes a single
+format enum shorthand, rather than an entire format struct. It then
+pretty-prints the commit according to that shorthand. These are similar to the
+formats available with `--pretty=FOO` in many Git commands.
+
+Build it and run, and if you're using the same name in the example, you should
+see the subject line of the most recent commit in `origin/master` that you know
+about. Neat! Let's commit that as well.
+
+----
+$ git add builtin/psuh.c
+$ git commit -sm "psuh: display the top of origin/master"
+----
+
+[[add-documentation]]
+=== Adding Documentation
+
+Awesome! You've got a fantastic new command that you're ready to share with the
+community. But hang on just a minute - this isn't very user-friendly. Run the
+following:
+
+----
+$ ./bin-wrappers/git help psuh
+----
+
+Your new command is undocumented! Let's fix that.
+
+Take a look at `Documentation/git-*.txt`. These are the manpages for the
+subcommands that Git knows about. You can open these up and take a look to get
+acquainted with the format, but then go ahead and make a new file
+`Documentation/git-psuh.txt`. Like with most of the documentation in the Git
+project, help pages are written with AsciiDoc (see CodingGuidelines, "Writing
+Documentation" section). Use the following template to fill out your own
+manpage:
+
+// Surprisingly difficult to embed AsciiDoc source within AsciiDoc.
+[listing]
+....
+git-psuh(1)
+===========
+
+NAME
+----
+git-psuh - Delight users' typo with a shy horse
+
+
+SYNOPSIS
+--------
+[verse]
+'git-psuh [<arg>...]'
+
+DESCRIPTION
+-----------
+...
+
+OPTIONS[[OPTIONS]]
+------------------
+...
+
+OUTPUT
+------
+...
+
+GIT
+---
+Part of the linkgit:git[1] suite
+....
+
+The most important pieces of this to note are the file header, underlined by =,
+the NAME section, and the SYNOPSIS, which would normally contain the grammar if
+your command took arguments. Try to use well-established manpage headers so your
+documentation is consistent with other Git and UNIX manpages; this makes life
+easier for your user, who can skip to the section they know contains the
+information they need.
+
+NOTE: Before trying to build the docs, make sure you have the package `asciidoc`
+installed.
+
+Now that you've written your manpage, you'll need to build it explicitly. We
+convert your AsciiDoc to troff which is man-readable like so:
+
+----
+$ make all doc
+$ man Documentation/git-psuh.1
+----
+
+or
+
+----
+$ make -C Documentation/ git-psuh.1
+$ man Documentation/git-psuh.1
+----
+
+While this isn't as satisfying as running through `git help`, you can at least
+check that your help page looks right.
+
+You can also check that the documentation coverage is good (that is, the project
+sees that your command has been implemented as well as documented) by running
+`make check-docs` from the top-level.
+
+Go ahead and commit your new documentation change.
+
+[[add-usage]]
+=== Adding Usage Text
+
+Try and run `./bin-wrappers/git psuh -h`. Your command should crash at the end.
+That's because `-h` is a special case which your command should handle by
+printing usage.
+
+Take a look at `Documentation/technical/api-parse-options.txt`. This is a handy
+tool for pulling out options you need to be able to handle, and it takes a
+usage string.
+
+In order to use it, we'll need to prepare a NULL-terminated array of usage
+strings and a `builtin_psuh_options` array.
+
+Add a line to `#include "parse-options.h"`.
+
+At global scope, add your array of usage strings:
+
+----
+static const char * const psuh_usage[] = {
+ N_("git psuh [<arg>...]"),
+ NULL,
+};
+----
+
+Then, within your `cmd_psuh()` implementation, we can declare and populate our
+`option` struct. Ours is pretty boring but you can add more to it if you want to
+explore `parse_options()` in more detail:
+
+----
+ struct option options[] = {
+ OPT_END()
+ };
+----
+
+Finally, before you print your args and prefix, add the call to
+`parse-options()`:
+
+----
+ argc = parse_options(argc, argv, prefix, options, psuh_usage, 0);
+----
+
+This call will modify your `argv` parameter. It will strip the options you
+specified in `options` from `argv` and the locations pointed to from `options`
+entries will be updated. Be sure to replace your `argc` with the result from
+`parse_options()`, or you will be confused if you try to parse `argv` later.
+
+It's worth noting the special argument `--`. As you may be aware, many Unix
+commands use `--` to indicate "end of named parameters" - all parameters after
+the `--` are interpreted merely as positional arguments. (This can be handy if
+you want to pass as a parameter something which would usually be interpreted as
+a flag.) `parse_options()` will terminate parsing when it reaches `--` and give
+you the rest of the options afterwards, untouched.
+
+Now that you have a usage hint, you can teach Git how to show it in the general
+command list shown by `git help git` or `git help -a`, which is generated from
+`command-list.txt`. Find the line for 'git-pull' so you can add your 'git-psuh'
+line above it in alphabetical order. Now, we can add some attributes about the
+command which impacts where it shows up in the aforementioned help commands. The
+top of `command-list.txt` shares some information about what each attribute
+means; in those help pages, the commands are sorted according to these
+attributes. `git psuh` is user-facing, or porcelain - so we will mark it as
+"mainporcelain". For "mainporcelain" commands, the comments at the top of
+`command-list.txt` indicate we can also optionally add an attribute from another
+list; since `git psuh` shows some information about the user's workspace but
+doesn't modify anything, let's mark it as "info". Make sure to keep your
+attributes in the same style as the rest of `command-list.txt` using spaces to
+align and delineate them:
+
+----
+git-prune-packed plumbingmanipulators
+git-psuh mainporcelain info
+git-pull mainporcelain remote
+git-push mainporcelain remote
+----
+
+Build again. Now, when you run with `-h`, you should see your usage printed and
+your command terminated before anything else interesting happens. Great!
+
+Go ahead and commit this one, too.
+
+[[testing]]
+== Testing
+
+It's important to test your code - even for a little toy command like this one.
+Moreover, your patch won't be accepted into the Git tree without tests. Your
+tests should:
+
+* Illustrate the current behavior of the feature
+* Prove the current behavior matches the expected behavior
+* Ensure the externally-visible behavior isn't broken in later changes
+
+So let's write some tests.
+
+Related reading: `t/README`
+
+[[overview-test-structure]]
+=== Overview of Testing Structure
+
+The tests in Git live in `t/` and are named with a 4-digit decimal number using
+the schema shown in the Naming Tests section of `t/README`.
+
+[[write-new-test]]
+=== Writing Your Test
+
+Since this a toy command, let's go ahead and name the test with t9999. However,
+as many of the family/subcmd combinations are full, best practice seems to be
+to find a command close enough to the one you've added and share its naming
+space.
+
+Create a new file `t/t9999-psuh-tutorial.sh`. Begin with the header as so (see
+"Writing Tests" and "Source 'test-lib.sh'" in `t/README`):
+
+----
+#!/bin/sh
+
+test_description='git-psuh test
+
+This test runs git-psuh and makes sure it does not crash.'
+
+. ./test-lib.sh
+----
+
+Tests are framed inside of a `test_expect_success` in order to output TAP
+formatted results. Let's make sure that `git psuh` doesn't exit poorly and does
+mention the right animal somewhere:
+
+----
+test_expect_success 'runs correctly with no args and good output' '
+ git psuh >actual &&
+ grep Pony actual
+'
+----
+
+Indicate that you've run everything you wanted by adding the following at the
+bottom of your script:
+
+----
+test_done
+----
+
+Make sure you mark your test script executable:
+
+----
+$ chmod +x t/t9999-psuh-tutorial.sh
+----
+
+You can get an idea of whether you created your new test script successfully
+by running `make -C t test-lint`, which will check for things like test number
+uniqueness, executable bit, and so on.
+
+[[local-test]]
+=== Running Locally
+
+Let's try and run locally:
+
+----
+$ make
+$ cd t/ && prove t9999-psuh-tutorial.sh
+----
+
+You can run the full test suite and ensure `git-psuh` didn't break anything:
+
+----
+$ cd t/
+$ prove -j$(nproc) --shuffle t[0-9]*.sh
+----
+
+NOTE: You can also do this with `make test` or use any testing harness which can
+speak TAP. `prove` can run concurrently. `shuffle` randomizes the order the
+tests are run in, which makes them resilient against unwanted inter-test
+dependencies. `prove` also makes the output nicer.
+
+Go ahead and commit this change, as well.
+
+[[ready-to-share]]
+== Getting Ready to Share: Anatomy of a Patch Series
+
+You may have noticed already that the Git project performs its code reviews via
+emailed patches, which are then applied by the maintainer when they are ready
+and approved by the community. The Git project does not accept contributions from
+pull requests, and the patches emailed for review need to be formatted a
+specific way.
+
+:patch-series: https://lore.kernel.org/git/pull.1218.git.git.1645209647.gitgitgadget@gmail.com/
+:lore: https://lore.kernel.org/git/
+
+Before taking a look at how to convert your commits into emailed patches,
+let's analyze what the end result, a "patch series", looks like. Here is an
+{patch-series}[example] of the summary view for a patch series on the web interface of
+the {lore}[Git mailing list archive]:
+
+----
+2022-02-18 18:40 [PATCH 0/3] libify reflog John Cai via GitGitGadget
+2022-02-18 18:40 ` [PATCH 1/3] reflog: libify delete reflog function and helpers John Cai via GitGitGadget
+2022-02-18 19:10 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason [this message]
+2022-02-18 19:39 ` Taylor Blau
+2022-02-18 19:48 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
+2022-02-18 19:35 ` Taylor Blau
+2022-02-21 1:43 ` John Cai
+2022-02-21 1:50 ` Taylor Blau
+2022-02-23 19:50 ` John Cai
+2022-02-18 20:00 ` // other replies elided
+2022-02-18 18:40 ` [PATCH 2/3] reflog: call reflog_delete from reflog.c John Cai via GitGitGadget
+2022-02-18 19:15 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
+2022-02-18 20:26 ` Junio C Hamano
+2022-02-18 18:40 ` [PATCH 3/3] stash: call reflog_delete from reflog.c John Cai via GitGitGadget
+2022-02-18 19:20 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
+2022-02-19 0:21 ` Taylor Blau
+2022-02-22 2:36 ` John Cai
+2022-02-22 10:51 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
+2022-02-18 19:29 ` [PATCH 0/3] libify reflog Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
+2022-02-22 18:30 ` [PATCH v2 0/3] libify reflog John Cai via GitGitGadget
+2022-02-22 18:30 ` [PATCH v2 1/3] stash: add test to ensure reflog --rewrite --updatref behavior John Cai via GitGitGadget
+2022-02-23 8:54 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
+2022-02-23 21:27 ` Junio C Hamano
+// continued
+----
+
+We can note a few things:
+
+- Each commit is sent as a separate email, with the commit message title as
+ subject, prefixed with "[PATCH _i_/_n_]" for the _i_-th commit of an
+ _n_-commit series.
+- Each patch is sent as a reply to an introductory email called the _cover
+ letter_ of the series, prefixed "[PATCH 0/_n_]".
+- Subsequent iterations of the patch series are labelled "PATCH v2", "PATCH
+ v3", etc. in place of "PATCH". For example, "[PATCH v2 1/3]" would be the first of
+ three patches in the second iteration. Each iteration is sent with a new cover
+ letter (like "[PATCH v2 0/3]" above), itself a reply to the cover letter of the
+ previous iteration (more on that below).
+
+NOTE: A single-patch topic is sent with "[PATCH]", "[PATCH v2]", etc. without
+_i_/_n_ numbering (in the above thread overview, no single-patch topic appears,
+though).
+
+[[cover-letter]]
+=== The cover letter
+
+In addition to an email per patch, the Git community also expects your patches
+to come with a cover letter. This is an important component of change
+submission as it explains to the community from a high level what you're trying
+to do, and why, in a way that's more apparent than just looking at your
+patches.
+
+The title of your cover letter should be something which succinctly covers the
+purpose of your entire topic branch. It's often in the imperative mood, just
+like our commit message titles. Here is how we'll title our series:
+
+---
+Add the 'psuh' command
+---
+
+The body of the cover letter is used to give additional context to reviewers.
+Be sure to explain anything your patches don't make clear on their own, but
+remember that since the cover letter is not recorded in the commit history,
+anything that might be useful to future readers of the repository's history
+should also be in your commit messages.
+
+Here's an example body for `psuh`:
+
+----
+Our internal metrics indicate widespread interest in the command
+git-psuh - that is, many users are trying to use it, but finding it is
+unavailable, using some unknown workaround instead.
+
+The following handful of patches add the psuh command and implement some
+handy features on top of it.
+
+This patchset is part of the MyFirstContribution tutorial and should not
+be merged.
+----
+
+At this point the tutorial diverges, in order to demonstrate two
+different methods of formatting your patchset and getting it reviewed.
+
+The first method to be covered is GitGitGadget, which is useful for those
+already familiar with GitHub's common pull request workflow. This method
+requires a GitHub account.
+
+The second method to be covered is `git send-email`, which can give slightly
+more fine-grained control over the emails to be sent. This method requires some
+setup which can change depending on your system and will not be covered in this
+tutorial.
+
+Regardless of which method you choose, your engagement with reviewers will be
+the same; the review process will be covered after the sections on GitGitGadget
+and `git send-email`.
+
+[[howto-ggg]]
+== Sending Patches via GitGitGadget
+
+One option for sending patches is to follow a typical pull request workflow and
+send your patches out via GitGitGadget. GitGitGadget is a tool created by
+Johannes Schindelin to make life as a Git contributor easier for those used to
+the GitHub PR workflow. It allows contributors to open pull requests against its
+mirror of the Git project, and does some magic to turn the PR into a set of
+emails and send them out for you. It also runs the Git continuous integration
+suite for you. It's documented at http://gitgitgadget.github.io.
+
+[[create-fork]]
+=== Forking `git/git` on GitHub
+
+Before you can send your patch off to be reviewed using GitGitGadget, you will
+need to fork the Git project and upload your changes. First thing - make sure
+you have a GitHub account.
+
+Head to the https://github.com/git/git[GitHub mirror] and look for the Fork
+button. Place your fork wherever you deem appropriate and create it.
+
+[[upload-to-fork]]
+=== Uploading to Your Own Fork
+
+To upload your branch to your own fork, you'll need to add the new fork as a
+remote. You can use `git remote -v` to show the remotes you have added already.
+From your new fork's page on GitHub, you can press "Clone or download" to get
+the URL; then you need to run the following to add, replacing your own URL and
+remote name for the examples provided:
+
+----
+$ git remote add remotename git@github.com:remotename/git.git
+----
+
+or to use the HTTPS URL:
+
+----
+$ git remote add remotename https://github.com/remotename/git/.git
+----
+
+Run `git remote -v` again and you should see the new remote showing up.
+`git fetch remotename` (with the real name of your remote replaced) in order to
+get ready to push.
+
+Next, double-check that you've been doing all your development in a new branch
+by running `git branch`. If you didn't, now is a good time to move your new
+commits to their own branch.
+
+As mentioned briefly at the beginning of this document, we are basing our work
+on `master`, so go ahead and update as shown below, or using your preferred
+workflow.
+
+----
+$ git checkout master
+$ git pull -r
+$ git rebase master psuh
+----
+
+Finally, you're ready to push your new topic branch! (Due to our branch and
+command name choices, be careful when you type the command below.)
+
+----
+$ git push remotename psuh
+----
+
+Now you should be able to go and check out your newly created branch on GitHub.
+
+[[send-pr-ggg]]
+=== Sending a PR to GitGitGadget
+
+In order to have your code tested and formatted for review, you need to start by
+opening a Pull Request against `gitgitgadget/git`. Head to
+https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git and open a PR either with the "New pull
+request" button or the convenient "Compare & pull request" button that may
+appear with the name of your newly pushed branch.
+
+Review the PR's title and description, as they're used by GitGitGadget
+respectively as the subject and body of the cover letter for your change. Refer
+to <<cover-letter,"The cover letter">> above for advice on how to title your
+submission and what content to include in the description.
+
+NOTE: For single-patch contributions, your commit message should already be
+meaningful and explain at a high level the purpose (what is happening and why)
+of your patch, so you usually do not need any additional context. In that case,
+remove the PR description that GitHub automatically generates from your commit
+message (your PR description should be empty). If you do need to supply even
+more context, you can do so in that space and it will be appended to the email
+that GitGitGadget will send, between the three-dash line and the diffstat
+(see <<single-patch,Bonus Chapter: One-Patch Changes>> for how this looks once
+submitted).
+
+When you're happy, submit your pull request.
+
+[[run-ci-ggg]]
+=== Running CI and Getting Ready to Send
+
+If it's your first time using GitGitGadget (which is likely, as you're using
+this tutorial) then someone will need to give you permission to use the tool.
+As mentioned in the GitGitGadget documentation, you just need someone who
+already uses it to comment on your PR with `/allow <username>`. GitGitGadget
+will automatically run your PRs through the CI even without the permission given
+but you will not be able to `/submit` your changes until someone allows you to
+use the tool.
+
+NOTE: You can typically find someone who can `/allow` you on GitGitGadget by
+either examining recent pull requests where someone has been granted `/allow`
+(https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git/pulls?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=is%3Apr+is%3Aopen+%22%2Fallow%22[Search:
+is:pr is:open "/allow"]), in which case both the author and the person who
+granted the `/allow` can now `/allow` you, or by inquiring on the
+https://web.libera.chat/#git-devel[#git-devel] IRC channel on Libera Chat
+linking your pull request and asking for someone to `/allow` you.
+
+If the CI fails, you can update your changes with `git rebase -i` and push your
+branch again:
+
+----
+$ git push -f remotename psuh
+----
+
+In fact, you should continue to make changes this way up until the point when
+your patch is accepted into `next`.
+
+////
+TODO https://github.com/gitgitgadget/gitgitgadget/issues/83
+It'd be nice to be able to verify that the patch looks good before sending it
+to everyone on Git mailing list.
+[[check-work-ggg]]
+=== Check Your Work
+////
+
+[[send-mail-ggg]]
+=== Sending Your Patches
+
+Now that your CI is passing and someone has granted you permission to use
+GitGitGadget with the `/allow` command, sending out for review is as simple as
+commenting on your PR with `/submit`.
+
+[[responding-ggg]]
+=== Updating With Comments
+
+Skip ahead to <<reviewing,Responding to Reviews>> for information on how to
+reply to review comments you will receive on the mailing list.
+
+Once you have your branch again in the shape you want following all review
+comments, you can submit again:
+
+----
+$ git push -f remotename psuh
+----
+
+Next, go look at your pull request against GitGitGadget; you should see the CI
+has been kicked off again. Now while the CI is running is a good time for you
+to modify your description at the top of the pull request thread; it will be
+used again as the cover letter. You should use this space to describe what
+has changed since your previous version, so that your reviewers have some idea
+of what they're looking at. When the CI is done running, you can comment once
+more with `/submit` - GitGitGadget will automatically add a v2 mark to your
+changes.
+
+[[howto-git-send-email]]
+== Sending Patches with `git send-email`
+
+If you don't want to use GitGitGadget, you can also use Git itself to mail your
+patches. Some benefits of using Git this way include finer grained control of
+subject line (for example, being able to use the tag [RFC PATCH] in the subject)
+and being able to send a ``dry run'' mail to yourself to ensure it all looks
+good before going out to the list.
+
+[[setup-git-send-email]]
+=== Prerequisite: Setting Up `git send-email`
+
+Configuration for `send-email` can vary based on your operating system and email
+provider, and so will not be covered in this tutorial, beyond stating that in
+many distributions of Linux, `git-send-email` is not packaged alongside the
+typical `git` install. You may need to install this additional package; there
+are a number of resources online to help you do so. You will also need to
+determine the right way to configure it to use your SMTP server; again, as this
+configuration can change significantly based on your system and email setup, it
+is out of scope for the context of this tutorial.
+
+[[format-patch]]
+=== Preparing Initial Patchset
+
+Sending emails with Git is a two-part process; before you can prepare the emails
+themselves, you'll need to prepare the patches. Luckily, this is pretty simple:
+
+----
+$ git format-patch --cover-letter -o psuh/ --base=auto psuh@{u}..psuh
+----
+
+ . The `--cover-letter` option tells `format-patch` to create a
+ cover letter template for you. You will need to fill in the
+ template before you're ready to send - but for now, the template
+ will be next to your other patches.
+
+ . The `-o psuh/` option tells `format-patch` to place the patch
+ files into a directory. This is useful because `git send-email`
+ can take a directory and send out all the patches from there.
+
+ . The `--base=auto` option tells the command to record the "base
+ commit", on which the recipient is expected to apply the patch
+ series. The `auto` value will cause `format-patch` to compute
+ the base commit automatically, which is the merge base of tip
+ commit of the remote-tracking branch and the specified revision
+ range.
+
+ . The `psuh@{u}..psuh` option tells `format-patch` to generate
+ patches for the commits you created on the `psuh` branch since it
+ forked from its upstream (which is `origin/master` if you
+ followed the example in the "Set up your workspace" section). If
+ you are already on the `psuh` branch, you can just say `@{u}`,
+ which means "commits on the current branch since it forked from
+ its upstream", which is the same thing.
+
+The command will make one patch file per commit. After you
+run, you can go have a look at each of the patches with your favorite text
+editor and make sure everything looks alright; however, it's not recommended to
+make code fixups via the patch file. It's a better idea to make the change the
+normal way using `git rebase -i` or by adding a new commit than by modifying a
+patch.
+
+NOTE: Optionally, you can also use the `--rfc` flag to prefix your patch subject
+with ``[RFC PATCH]'' instead of ``[PATCH]''. RFC stands for ``request for
+comments'' and indicates that while your code isn't quite ready for submission,
+you'd like to begin the code review process. This can also be used when your
+patch is a proposal, but you aren't sure whether the community wants to solve
+the problem with that approach or not - to conduct a sort of design review. You
+may also see on the list patches marked ``WIP'' - this means they are incomplete
+but want reviewers to look at what they have so far. You can add this flag with
+`--subject-prefix=WIP`.
+
+Check and make sure that your patches and cover letter template exist in the
+directory you specified - you're nearly ready to send out your review!
+
+[[preparing-cover-letter]]
+=== Preparing Email
+
+Since you invoked `format-patch` with `--cover-letter`, you've already got a
+cover letter template ready. Open it up in your favorite editor.
+
+You should see a number of headers present already. Check that your `From:`
+header is correct. Then modify your `Subject:` (see <<cover-letter,above>> for
+how to choose good title for your patch series):
+
+----
+Subject: [PATCH 0/7] Add the 'psuh' command
+----
+
+Make sure you retain the ``[PATCH 0/X]'' part; that's what indicates to the Git
+community that this email is the beginning of a patch series, and many
+reviewers filter their email for this type of flag.
+
+You'll need to add some extra parameters when you invoke `git send-email` to add
+the cover letter.
+
+Next you'll have to fill out the body of your cover letter. Again, see
+<<cover-letter,above>> for what content to include.
+
+The template created by `git format-patch --cover-letter` includes a diffstat.
+This gives reviewers a summary of what they're in for when reviewing your topic.
+The one generated for `psuh` from the sample implementation looks like this:
+
+----
+ Documentation/git-psuh.txt | 40 +++++++++++++++++++++
+ Makefile | 1 +
+ builtin.h | 1 +
+ builtin/psuh.c | 73 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+ git.c | 1 +
+ t/t9999-psuh-tutorial.sh | 12 +++++++
+ 6 files changed, 128 insertions(+)
+ create mode 100644 Documentation/git-psuh.txt
+ create mode 100644 builtin/psuh.c
+ create mode 100755 t/t9999-psuh-tutorial.sh
+----
+
+Finally, the letter will include the version of Git used to generate the
+patches. You can leave that string alone.
+
+[[sending-git-send-email]]
+=== Sending Email
+
+At this point you should have a directory `psuh/` which is filled with your
+patches and a cover letter. Time to mail it out! You can send it like this:
+
+----
+$ git send-email --to=target@example.com psuh/*.patch
+----
+
+NOTE: Check `git help send-email` for some other options which you may find
+valuable, such as changing the Reply-to address or adding more CC and BCC lines.
+
+NOTE: When you are sending a real patch, it will go to git@vger.kernel.org - but
+please don't send your patchset from the tutorial to the real mailing list! For
+now, you can send it to yourself, to make sure you understand how it will look.
+
+After you run the command above, you will be presented with an interactive
+prompt for each patch that's about to go out. This gives you one last chance to
+edit or quit sending something (but again, don't edit code this way). Once you
+press `y` or `a` at these prompts your emails will be sent! Congratulations!
+
+Awesome, now the community will drop everything and review your changes. (Just
+kidding - be patient!)
+
+[[v2-git-send-email]]
+=== Sending v2
+
+This section will focus on how to send a v2 of your patchset. To learn what
+should go into v2, skip ahead to <<reviewing,Responding to Reviews>> for
+information on how to handle comments from reviewers.
+
+We'll reuse our `psuh` topic branch for v2. Before we make any changes, we'll
+mark the tip of our v1 branch for easy reference:
+
+----
+$ git checkout psuh
+$ git branch psuh-v1
+----
+
+Refine your patch series by using `git rebase -i` to adjust commits based upon
+reviewer comments. Once the patch series is ready for submission, generate your
+patches again, but with some new flags:
+
+----
+$ git format-patch -v2 --cover-letter -o psuh/ --range-diff master..psuh-v1 master..
+----
+
+The `--range-diff master..psuh-v1` parameter tells `format-patch` to include a
+range-diff between `psuh-v1` and `psuh` in the cover letter (see
+linkgit:git-range-diff[1]). This helps tell reviewers about the differences
+between your v1 and v2 patches.
+
+The `-v2` parameter tells `format-patch` to output your patches
+as version "2". For instance, you may notice that your v2 patches are
+all named like `v2-000n-my-commit-subject.patch`. `-v2` will also format
+your patches by prefixing them with "[PATCH v2]" instead of "[PATCH]",
+and your range-diff will be prefaced with "Range-diff against v1".
+
+After you run this command, `format-patch` will output the patches to the `psuh/`
+directory, alongside the v1 patches. Using a single directory makes it easy to
+refer to the old v1 patches while proofreading the v2 patches, but you will need
+to be careful to send out only the v2 patches. We will use a pattern like
+"psuh/v2-*.patch" (not "psuh/*.patch", which would match v1 and v2 patches).
+
+Edit your cover letter again. Now is a good time to mention what's different
+between your last version and now, if it's something significant. You do not
+need the exact same body in your second cover letter; focus on explaining to
+reviewers the changes you've made that may not be as visible.
+
+You will also need to go and find the Message-Id of your previous cover letter.
+You can either note it when you send the first series, from the output of `git
+send-email`, or you can look it up on the
+https://lore.kernel.org/git[mailing list]. Find your cover letter in the
+archives, click on it, then click "permalink" or "raw" to reveal the Message-Id
+header. It should match:
+
+----
+Message-Id: <foo.12345.author@example.com>
+----
+
+Your Message-Id is `<foo.12345.author@example.com>`. This example will be used
+below as well; make sure to replace it with the correct Message-Id for your
+**previous cover letter** - that is, if you're sending v2, use the Message-Id
+from v1; if you're sending v3, use the Message-Id from v2.
+
+While you're looking at the email, you should also note who is CC'd, as it's
+common practice in the mailing list to keep all CCs on a thread. You can add
+these CC lines directly to your cover letter with a line like so in the header
+(before the Subject line):
+
+----
+CC: author@example.com, Othe R <other@example.com>
+----
+
+Now send the emails again, paying close attention to which messages you pass in
+to the command:
+
+----
+$ git send-email --to=target@example.com
+ --in-reply-to="<foo.12345.author@example.com>"
+ psuh/v2-*.patch
+----
+
+[[single-patch]]
+=== Bonus Chapter: One-Patch Changes
+
+In some cases, your very small change may consist of only one patch. When that
+happens, you only need to send one email. Your commit message should already be
+meaningful and explain at a high level the purpose (what is happening and why)
+of your patch, but if you need to supply even more context, you can do so below
+the `---` in your patch. Take the example below, which was generated with `git
+format-patch` on a single commit, and then edited to add the content between
+the `---` and the diffstat.
+
+----
+From 1345bbb3f7ac74abde040c12e737204689a72723 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
+From: A U Thor <author@example.com>
+Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2019 15:11:02 -0700
+Subject: [PATCH] README: change the grammar
+
+I think it looks better this way. This part of the commit message will
+end up in the commit-log.
+
+Signed-off-by: A U Thor <author@example.com>
+---
+Let's have a wild discussion about grammar on the mailing list. This
+part of my email will never end up in the commit log. Here is where I
+can add additional context to the mailing list about my intent, outside
+of the context of the commit log. This section was added after `git
+format-patch` was run, by editing the patch file in a text editor.
+
+ README.md | 2 +-
+ 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
+
+diff --git a/README.md b/README.md
+index 88f126184c..38da593a60 100644
+--- a/README.md
++++ b/README.md
+@@ -3,7 +3,7 @@
+ Git - fast, scalable, distributed revision control system
+ =========================================================
+
+-Git is a fast, scalable, distributed revision control system with an
++Git is a fast, scalable, and distributed revision control system with an
+ unusually rich command set that provides both high-level operations
+ and full access to internals.
+
+--
+2.21.0.392.gf8f6787159e-goog
+----
+
+[[now-what]]
+== My Patch Got Emailed - Now What?
+
+[[reviewing]]
+=== Responding to Reviews
+
+After a few days, you will hopefully receive a reply to your patchset with some
+comments. Woohoo! Now you can get back to work.
+
+It's good manners to reply to each comment, notifying the reviewer that you have
+made the change suggested, feel the original is better, or that the comment
+inspired you to do something a new way which is superior to both the original
+and the suggested change. This way reviewers don't need to inspect your v2 to
+figure out whether you implemented their comment or not.
+
+Reviewers may ask you about what you wrote in the patchset, either in
+the proposed commit log message or in the changes themselves. You
+should answer these questions in your response messages, but often the
+reason why reviewers asked these questions to understand what you meant
+to write is because your patchset needed clarification to be understood.
+
+Do not be satisfied by just answering their questions in your response
+and hear them say that they now understand what you wanted to say.
+Update your patches to clarify the points reviewers had trouble with,
+and prepare your v2; the words you used to explain your v1 to answer
+reviewers' questions may be useful thing to use. Your goal is to make
+your v2 clear enough so that it becomes unnecessary for you to give the
+same explanation to the next person who reads it.
+
+If you are going to push back on a comment, be polite and explain why you feel
+your original is better; be prepared that the reviewer may still disagree with
+you, and the rest of the community may weigh in on one side or the other. As
+with all code reviews, it's important to keep an open mind to doing something a
+different way than you originally planned; other reviewers have a different
+perspective on the project than you do, and may be thinking of a valid side
+effect which had not occurred to you. It is always okay to ask for clarification
+if you aren't sure why a change was suggested, or what the reviewer is asking
+you to do.
+
+Make sure your email client has a plaintext email mode and it is turned on; the
+Git list rejects HTML email. Please also follow the mailing list etiquette
+outlined in the
+https://kernel.googlesource.com/pub/scm/git/git/+/todo/MaintNotes[Maintainer's
+Note], which are similar to etiquette rules in most open source communities
+surrounding bottom-posting and inline replies.
+
+When you're making changes to your code, it is cleanest - that is, the resulting
+commits are easiest to look at - if you use `git rebase -i` (interactive
+rebase). Take a look at this
+https://www.oreilly.com/library/view/git-pocket-guide/9781449327507/ch10.html[overview]
+from O'Reilly. The general idea is to modify each commit which requires changes;
+this way, instead of having a patch A with a mistake, a patch B which was fine
+and required no upstream reviews in v1, and a patch C which fixes patch A for
+v2, you can just ship a v2 with a correct patch A and correct patch B. This is
+changing history, but since it's local history which you haven't shared with
+anyone, that is okay for now! (Later, it may not make sense to do this; take a
+look at the section below this one for some context.)
+
+[[after-approval]]
+=== After Review Approval
+
+The Git project has four integration branches: `seen`, `next`, `master`, and
+`maint`. Your change will be placed into `seen` fairly early on by the maintainer
+while it is still in the review process; from there, when it is ready for wider
+testing, it will be merged into `next`. Plenty of early testers use `next` and
+may report issues. Eventually, changes in `next` will make it to `master`,
+which is typically considered stable. Finally, when a new release is cut,
+`maint` is used to base bugfixes onto. As mentioned at the beginning of this
+document, you can read `Documents/SubmittingPatches` for some more info about
+the use of the various integration branches.
+
+Back to now: your code has been lauded by the upstream reviewers. It is perfect.
+It is ready to be accepted. You don't need to do anything else; the maintainer
+will merge your topic branch to `next` and life is good.
+
+However, if you discover it isn't so perfect after this point, you may need to
+take some special steps depending on where you are in the process.
+
+If the maintainer has announced in the "What's cooking in git.git" email that
+your topic is marked for `next` - that is, that they plan to merge it to `next`
+but have not yet done so - you should send an email asking the maintainer to
+wait a little longer: "I've sent v4 of my series and you marked it for `next`,
+but I need to change this and that - please wait for v5 before you merge it."
+
+If the topic has already been merged to `next`, rather than modifying your
+patches with `git rebase -i`, you should make further changes incrementally -
+that is, with another commit, based on top of the maintainer's topic branch as
+detailed in https://github.com/gitster/git. Your work is still in the same topic
+but is now incremental, rather than a wholesale rewrite of the topic branch.
+
+The topic branches in the maintainer's GitHub are mirrored in GitGitGadget, so
+if you're sending your reviews out that way, you should be sure to open your PR
+against the appropriate GitGitGadget/Git branch.
+
+If you're using `git send-email`, you can use it the same way as before, but you
+should generate your diffs from `<topic>..<mybranch>` and base your work on
+`<topic>` instead of `master`.