German update in three patches

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
6 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

German update in three patches

Till
Hi John,

just updated the German pages in three steps, also included now two
other files (de/switch/new-notation.html and de/documentation.html).

but two issues remain:

I always get patch files from older patches that are definitely not
actual anymore -- can I somehow remove them myself? You see it by the
number of the current files: there are obviously six (older) changes in
my git that are not applied to the master git. But it doesn't make sense
to apply them anymore because they are outdated.

And the big page about engraving is not in German, so the build file
doesn't obviously generate it from the translated sites. Can you fix that?

Greetings
Till

_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

patchesGermanWebsite.zip (11K) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: German update in three patches

John Mandereau
Le samedi 13 janvier 2007 à 16:49 +0200, Till Rettig a écrit :

> Hi John,
>
> just updated the German pages in three steps, also included now two
> other files (de/switch/new-notation.html and de/documentation.html).
>
> but two issues remain:
>
> I always get patch files from older patches that are definitely not
> actual anymore -- can I somehow remove them myself? You see it by the
> number of the current files: there are obviously six (older) changes in
> my git that are not applied to the master git. But it doesn't make sense
> to apply them anymore because they are outdated.

What command exactly do you use to generate patches?  The following
should make clean patches, as long as you committed all your changes and
pulled:

        git-format-patch web/master..myweb

Anyway, the most important is that your patches cleanly apply on the
latest git.sv.gnu.org.  These patches you sent are not clean: I had to
fix a committish manually, and you made documentation.html translation
in site/ !!!  When I am in a bad mood, I may ask you to resend clean
patches ;-)

According to 'make LANG=de check-translation', the German pages are up
to date; I hope you make sure it is correct.


> And the big page about engraving is not in German, so the build file
> doesn't obviously generate it from the translated sites. Can you fix that?

I've already fixed that for German and Spanish translations (in
GNUmakefile) and pushed to Git.  The site I build myself in out/site
with 'make' looks good, but it looks like it hasn't changed on
lilypond.org (it still shows only French and English big pages).  Jan,
do you know what's wrong?


Greetings
--
John Mandereau <[hidden email]>



_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: German update in three patches

Johannes Schindelin
In reply to this post by Till
Hi,

On Sat, 13 Jan 2007, Till Rettig wrote:

> I always get patch files from older patches that are definitely not actual
> anymore -- can I somehow remove them myself? You see it by the number of the
> current files: there are obviously six (older) changes in my git that are not
> applied to the master git. But it doesn't make sense to apply them anymore
> because they are outdated.

There are several ways to handle that. In my order of preference, the
two (IMHO) best ways:

- if you _know_ that the patches will apply cleanly against the upstream,
  and you _know_ you want to submit three patches, say

  $ git format-patch HEAD~3

- if you don't know if the patches apply cleanly, you can start a new
  branch, cherry-picking your way through the commits you want to save.
  For example, if you want to save the commits myweb~4, myweb~2 and myweb,
  do this:

  # start a new branch, called "startanew", branching from "web/master"
  $ git checkout -b startanew web/master

  # pick the three commits
  $ git cherry-pick myweb~4
  $ git cherry-pick myweb~2
  $ git cherry-pick myweb

  To throw away _all_ your previous work in myweb, and _only_ retain these
  three commits, do

  # go back to the branch "myweb"
  $ git checkout myweb

  # replace the _complete_ history of the current branch by that of "startanew"
  $ git reset --hard startanew

  # delete the branch "startanew"
  $ git branch -d startanew

If you want to retain just the last <n> commits, you might want to play
with git-rebase (better read the documentation for that, since I am
uncomfortable with that command).

Hth,
Dscho



_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: German update in three patches

Till
In reply to this post by John Mandereau


John Mandereau wrote:

What command exactly do you use to generate patches?  The following
should make clean patches, as long as you committed all your changes and
pulled:

	git-format-patch web/master..myweb
  
Yes, I used this without the ..myweb part.
I see there is some differences: some recommend to use git-format-patch HEAD^ and the others git-format-patch web/master (or then with this ..myweb continuation)
Anyway, the most important is that your patches cleanly apply on the
latest git.sv.gnu.org.  These patches you sent are not clean: I had to
fix a committish manually, and you made documentation.html translation
in site/ !!!  When I am in a bad mood, I may ask you to resend clean
patches ;-)
  
Yes, that's what you should do. I'm really sorry about this documentation issue! Thanks for changing it.
But I still don't know how to keep the diffs clean.
I found that there is a difference: git-rev-parse HEAD^ gives another commitish than git-rev-parse web/master. I used the latter one because that's what I found in the README. I guess one is my local one and the other the one from the internet. Well, now it asked me some merge, and I  changed the parts in the <<<< >>>> and made git add and git-commit. Now it doesn't complain anymore about these differences: is this how you do a merge, then?
According to 'make LANG=de check-translation', the German pages are up
to date; I hope you make sure it is correct.
  
Yes, now the script gives me the output that the site/documentation is changed. But this is the mistake that I made, so it is actually about de/translation or in other words: you redid the change I did to site/documentation. Should I just commit the documentation file again with the new commitish number? Will that stop the check-translation script from telling me about a page?

I will have to make some other changes to the translation: I will try it another time with the commands from the README, but you should complain if it is not cleanly applying, then I might just start a total new branch and continue with this one.

Greetings
Till




_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: German update in three patches

Johannes Schindelin
Hi,

On Sun, 14 Jan 2007, Till Rettig wrote:

> John Mandereau wrote:
> >
> > What command exactly do you use to generate patches?  The following
> > should make clean patches, as long as you committed all your changes and
> > pulled:
> >
> > git-format-patch web/master..myweb
> >  
> Yes, I used this without the ..myweb part.
> I see there is some differences: some recommend to use git-format-patch HEAD^
> and the others git-format-patch web/master (or then with this ..myweb
> continuation)

Basically, if you omit the "..<commit>" part, it assumes "..HEAD".

> I found that there is a difference: git-rev-parse HEAD^ gives another
> commitish than git-rev-parse web/master.

This is expected. HEAD^ is the parent of your current (private) branch,
whereas web/master is the upstream (public) one. So they never match
(except after exactly one commit after branching from web/master).

> Well, now it asked me some merge, and I changed the parts in the <<<<
> >>>> and made git add and git-commit. Now it doesn't complain anymore
> about these differences: is this how you do a merge, then?

Yes. Usually you expect no conflicts (this is what you see between "<<<<",
"====" and ">>>>"). But in your case, some changes which you did not
submit (or which were not applied) touched the same parts, so they
conflicted.

BTW If you _know_ that something _will_ conflict, you can "undo" commits
with "git revert <commit>". I say "undo", because this will revert the
patch, but _add_ a commit. The upside is, you can also revert older
commits, e.g. HEAD~5.

Ciao,
Dscho



_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: German update in three patches

John Mandereau
In reply to this post by Till
Le dimanche 14 janvier 2007 à 15:31 +0200, Till Rettig a écrit :

> John Mandereau wrote:
> >
> > What command exactly do you use to generate patches?  The following
> > should make clean patches, as long as you committed all your changes and
> > pulled:
> >
> > git-format-patch web/master..myweb
> >  
> Yes, I used this without the ..myweb part.
> I see there is some differences: some recommend to use
> git-format-patch HEAD^ and the others git-format-patch web/master (or
> then with this ..myweb continuation)

Instructions from README are preferred.  They are not perfect, but are
designed to work even if you don't understand every technical detail.
In this case, a patch generated with "git-format-patch HEAD^" isn't
supposed to apply cleanly to the upstream branch (web/master on
git.sv.gnu.org), that's why I recommend "git-format-patch
web/master..myweb".


> But I still don't know how to keep the diffs clean.
> I found that there is a difference: git-rev-parse HEAD^ gives another
> commitish than git-rev-parse web/master. I used the latter one because
> that's what I found in the README. I guess one is my local one and the
> other the one from the internet. Well, now it asked me some merge, and
> I  changed the parts in the <<<< >>>> and made git add and git-commit.
> Now it doesn't complain anymore about these differences: is this how
> you do a merge, then?

Yes.  This one was a merge with conflicts; when you are lucky, you can
merge without conflicts :)


> > According to 'make LANG=de check-translation', the German pages are up
> > to date; I hope you make sure it is correct.
> >  
> Yes, now the script gives me the output that the site/documentation is
> changed. But this is the mistake that I made, so it is actually about
> de/translation or in other words: you redid the change I did to
> site/documentation. Should I just commit the documentation file again
> with the new commitish number? Will that stop the check-translation
> script from telling me about a page?

Yep, if a commit in English pages doesn't affect the translation, or if
the translation is already up to date, update the committishes and
commit.


Cheers
--
John Mandereau <[hidden email]>



_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel