Biggest disadvantage I see on the official documents is they don't contain the hypothetical situation when something is wrong, they are relying on the fact that everything is as it's supposed to be - perfect. That user has perfectly configured system, that user doesn't accidentally break repository or get lost in some process and stuck as they can't continue for whatever reason.
I couldn't resist posting on this thread. I am relatively a new MediaWiki developer and I started bug fixing 2 months ago during which I had to go through https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Gerrit/Tutorial and many other references spread over the Internet. The Tutorial assumes that everything goes smoothly. Although the https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Gerrit/Advanced_usage#Troubleshooting article does solve few of the problems, there are still many issues to be highlighted like what should the user do to undo a commit, some information regarding staging and unstaging would be helpful, commands like "git show <hash>" to view the changes after a developer commits, use of git log with the option "-p". These are just a few features that I would love to see and maybe other new developers too.
Thanks
On Sat, May 11, 2013 at 3:05 AM, S Page spage@wikimedia.org wrote:
I think that it might be a good idea to add another tutorial for
complete newbies.
Note Mediawiki.org doesn't have a "Git tutorial". There are tons of those on the web. Thanks to recent work (by Quim and others I think) we have three fairly rational pages, https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Gerrit/Getting_started https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Gerrit/Tutorial https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Gerrit/Advanced_usage
Improve those. I'm certain more pages won't help. Git+Gerrit is fundamentally hard and complicated with lots of steps and commands, so the tutorial is going to be long with lots of sections. Additional pages writing down "Stuff I found difficult before and after going through the tutorial" just add to the confusion.
Petr's document is useful for the dwindling band of people familiar with svn, and I'm not sure why it mentions git push (I never use it, I use git review with gerrit).
A big problem with the documents is inconsistent setup. They don't even agree whether the remote should be called origin, gerrit, or review, because the experts who add to them have different opinions.
-- =S Page software engineer on E3 _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l