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(a)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(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l