Hi
I started to use Ipfire 2.13 core 75 last week, and I have found a few bugs and some areas for improvements. I have made 3 pull requests on github, https://github.com/ipfire/ipfire-2.x/pulls, from my github https://github.com/alfh/ipfire-2.x.
What process do you prefer for people suggesting bug fixes and minor improvements ?
Should I make an issue in the bug tracker for each of my pull requests ?
Should I rather attach a patch to a bug tracker issue than issuing pull requests on github ?
I guess improvements I should raise on this mailing list, to see if other people agree on the improvement ?
I have made a bug fix and an improvements to updxlrator, a fix to netexternal.cgi and started an improvement on firewalllog.dat.
I also have just started playing with another improvement, to list the number of firewall log entries per country, to be able to see where blocked machines are coming from. Is this something you think would be useful ?
Regards Alf Høgemark
Hey Alf,
On Sun, 2014-02-09 at 09:01 +0100, Alf Høgemark wrote:
Hi
I started to use Ipfire 2.13 core 75 last week, and I have found a few bugs and some areas for improvements. I have made 3 pull requests on github, https://github.com/ipfire/ipfire-2.x/pulls, from my github https://github.com/alfh/ipfire-2.x.
What process do you prefer for people suggesting bug fixes and minor improvements ?
We are mirroring our repositories to GitHub because some people asked for that so that they can easily check-in their changes and send them our way. That is basically all we use of GitHub. We don't use the integrated wiki, nor the issue tracker, nor anything else.
For some reason, I don't get email notifications when someone sends a pull request, so please let me apologize for not responding to those you made.
Should I make an issue in the bug tracker for each of my pull requests ?
Should I rather attach a patch to a bug tracker issue than issuing pull requests on github ?
Basically yes.
This might depend a little bit on what the changes include, but I think the bugtracker is the best option for most cases. You may still use your GitHub repository and point to the branch that should be pulled. A set of patches for each commit is also fine.
I guess improvements I should raise on this mailing list, to see if other people agree on the improvement ?
Yes, that is the other option if you are not too sure if what you changed will work or if it is a something other you want other people's opinion on.
I have made a bug fix and an improvements to updxlrator, a fix to netexternal.cgi and started an improvement on firewalllog.dat.
I am now aware of this and will pull these things from GitHub so that you don't need to create bugs.
I also have just started playing with another improvement, to list the number of firewall log entries per country, to be able to see where blocked machines are coming from. Is this something you think would be useful ?
Of course enhancing the logging functionality is always useful as long as the things that are currently there will still be available and nothing will be duplicated.
Thank you very much for your contributions. I really appreciated it. Give me a couple of days to have a look at them and merge them.
Best, -Michael
On 02/09/2014 03:01 PM, Michael Tremer wrote:
Should I make an issue in the bug tracker for each of my pull requests ? Should I rather attach a patch to a bug tracker issue than issuing pull requests on github ?
Basically yes.
This might depend a little bit on what the changes include, but I think the bugtracker is the best option for most cases. You may still use your GitHub repository and point to the branch that should be pulled. A set of patches for each commit is also fine.
Could you give some information about what branches you use on git.ipfire.org ? http://git.ipfire.org/?p=ipfire-2.x.git;a=summary
I see the "next" branch, the "master" branch, "core75" branch and for example the "fifteen" branch. I haven't found information about that on the wiki. I would appreciate a few word about these branches.
Will 2.15 be "core76" ?
If I have some bug fixes for the current 2.13 core 75, what git branch should I work against ? The "core75" branch?
If I have some improvements that I think could maybe be part of 2.15, what git branch should I work against ?
Regards Alf
Hi Alf,
the different branches have the following purpose:
master: Is the branch with the code that is currently shipped (core update n).
next: The branch which is going to become the next release (core update n+1).
On top of that, we sometimes have feature branches.
Everything that is sent our way should be branched from and apply to next. There might be some occasions where master is also suitable, but next is the default.
Best, -Michael
On Tue, 2014-02-11 at 18:34 +0100, Alf Høgemark wrote:
On 02/09/2014 03:01 PM, Michael Tremer wrote:
Should I make an issue in the bug tracker for each of my pull requests ? Should I rather attach a patch to a bug tracker issue than issuing pull requests on github ?
Basically yes.
This might depend a little bit on what the changes include, but I think the bugtracker is the best option for most cases. You may still use your GitHub repository and point to the branch that should be pulled. A set of patches for each commit is also fine.
Could you give some information about what branches you use on git.ipfire.org ? http://git.ipfire.org/?p=ipfire-2.x.git;a=summary
I see the "next" branch, the "master" branch, "core75" branch and for example the "fifteen" branch. I haven't found information about that on the wiki. I would appreciate a few word about these branches.
Will 2.15 be "core76" ?
If I have some bug fixes for the current 2.13 core 75, what git branch should I work against ? The "core75" branch?
If I have some improvements that I think could maybe be part of 2.15, what git branch should I work against ?
Regards Alf
Hi I will try to rebase my github pull requests to next branch then. Thans for the info about the branches, it should probably be put on wiki on development page.
Alf
Den 12. feb. 2014 kl. 20:04 skrev Michael Tremer michael.tremer@ipfire.org:
Hi Alf,
the different branches have the following purpose:
master: Is the branch with the code that is currently shipped (core update n).
next: The branch which is going to become the next release (core update n+1).
On top of that, we sometimes have feature branches.
Everything that is sent our way should be branched from and apply to next. There might be some occasions where master is also suitable, but next is the default.
Best, -Michael
On Tue, 2014-02-11 at 18:34 +0100, Alf Høgemark wrote:
On 02/09/2014 03:01 PM, Michael Tremer wrote:
Should I make an issue in the bug tracker for each of my pull requests ? Should I rather attach a patch to a bug tracker issue than issuing pull requests on github ?
Basically yes.
This might depend a little bit on what the changes include, but I think the bugtracker is the best option for most cases. You may still use your GitHub repository and point to the branch that should be pulled. A set of patches for each commit is also fine.
Could you give some information about what branches you use on git.ipfire.org ? http://git.ipfire.org/?p=ipfire-2.x.git;a=summary
I see the "next" branch, the "master" branch, "core75" branch and for example the "fifteen" branch. I haven't found information about that on the wiki. I would appreciate a few word about these branches.
Will 2.15 be "core76" ?
If I have some bug fixes for the current 2.13 core 75, what git branch should I work against ? The "core75" branch?
If I have some improvements that I think could maybe be part of 2.15, what git branch should I work against ?
Regards Alf
Hi,
feel free to edit the wiki and add missing information.
Those trivial changes don't need to be rebased.
-Michael
On Wed, 2014-02-12 at 20:49 +0100, Alf Høgemark wrote:
Hi I will try to rebase my github pull requests to next branch then. Thans for the info about the branches, it should probably be put on wiki on development page.
Alf
Den 12. feb. 2014 kl. 20:04 skrev Michael Tremer michael.tremer@ipfire.org:
Hi Alf,
the different branches have the following purpose:
master: Is the branch with the code that is currently shipped (core update n).
next: The branch which is going to become the next release (core update n+1).
On top of that, we sometimes have feature branches.
Everything that is sent our way should be branched from and apply to next. There might be some occasions where master is also suitable, but next is the default.
Best, -Michael
On Tue, 2014-02-11 at 18:34 +0100, Alf Høgemark wrote:
On 02/09/2014 03:01 PM, Michael Tremer wrote:
Should I make an issue in the bug tracker for each of my pull requests ? Should I rather attach a patch to a bug tracker issue than issuing pull requests on github ?
Basically yes.
This might depend a little bit on what the changes include, but I think the bugtracker is the best option for most cases. You may still use your GitHub repository and point to the branch that should be pulled. A set of patches for each commit is also fine.
Could you give some information about what branches you use on git.ipfire.org ? http://git.ipfire.org/?p=ipfire-2.x.git;a=summary
I see the "next" branch, the "master" branch, "core75" branch and for example the "fifteen" branch. I haven't found information about that on the wiki. I would appreciate a few word about these branches.
Will 2.15 be "core76" ?
If I have some bug fixes for the current 2.13 core 75, what git branch should I work against ? The "core75" branch?
If I have some improvements that I think could maybe be part of 2.15, what git branch should I work against ?
Regards Alf
Hi
I have rebased all my changes, and made new pull requests on github. ll my pull requests are independent, I am not sure if that was wise, you might get some conflicts when you have applied some pull requests, and then try to apply the last ones. Let me know, and I can rebase. I think you should apply the pull request with the lower pull request number first etc.
I've also added some info on http://wiki.ipfire.org/en/development/git, to reflect your comments about git branch usage.
Regards Alf
Den ons, februar 12, 2014, 21:09 skrev Michael Tremer:
Hi,
feel free to edit the wiki and add missing information.
Those trivial changes don't need to be rebased.
-Michael
On Wed, 2014-02-12 at 20:49 +0100, Alf Høgemark wrote:
Hi I will try to rebase my github pull requests to next branch
then.
Thans for the info about the branches, it should probably be put
on wiki
on development page.
Alf
Den 12. feb. 2014 kl. 20:04 skrev Michael Tremer michael.tremer@ipfire.org:
Hi Alf,
the different branches have the following purpose:
master: Is the branch with the code that is currently shipped (core
update n).
next: The branch which is going to become the next release (core
update
n+1).
On top of that, we sometimes have feature branches.
Everything that is sent our way should be branched from and
apply to
next. There might be some occasions where master is also
suitable, but
next is the default.
Hi,
thanks.
I merged the language fixes and HTML cleanup commits and had to resolve some minor merge conflicts. No big deal.
On Sun, 2014-02-16 at 07:17 +0100, alf@i100.no wrote:
Hi
I have rebased all my changes, and made new pull requests on github. ll my pull requests are independent, I am not sure if that was wise, you might get some conflicts when you have applied some pull requests, and then try to apply the last ones. Let me know, and I can rebase. I think you should apply the pull request with the lower pull request number first etc.
I've also added some info on http://wiki.ipfire.org/en/development/git, to reflect your comments about git branch usage.
Great. Whenever you feel that something is missing and you cannot find it in the English version of the wiki, please add it :)
-Michael
Regards Alf
Den ons, februar 12, 2014, 21:09 skrev Michael Tremer:
Hi,
feel free to edit the wiki and add missing information.
Those trivial changes don't need to be rebased.
-Michael
On Wed, 2014-02-12 at 20:49 +0100, Alf Høgemark wrote:
Hi I will try to rebase my github pull requests to next branch then. Thans for the info about the branches, it should probably be put on
wiki
on development page.
Alf
Den 12. feb. 2014 kl. 20:04 skrev Michael Tremer michael.tremer@ipfire.org:
Hi Alf,
the different branches have the following purpose:
master: Is the branch with the code that is currently shipped (core
update n).
next: The branch which is going to become the next release (core update
n+1).
On top of that, we sometimes have feature branches.
Everything that is sent our way should be branched from and apply
to
next. There might be some occasions where master is also
suitable, but
next is the default.
-
Alf Høgemark -
alf＠i100.no
-
Michael Tremer