git
Any comment about upcoming Git Rev News edition 109
A currently mostly empty draft is there:
https://github.com/git/git.github.io/blob/master/rev_news/drafts/edition-109.md
Feel free to comment in this issue, suggest topics, suggest persons to interview, or use the edit button (that looks like a pen) to edit and create a pull request with the changes you would like.
Let's try to publish this edition around the end of March 2024!
Thanks!
cc @jnareb @mjaix @sivaraam @gitster @stepnem
Hey, I think part 2 of "So You Think You Know Git" can be incorporated in this edition: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Md44rcw13k4
We may see more discussion on improving workflows to work on Git.
There is a talk to allow patch authors to propose the summary of the topic to appear in the release notes.
To make it easier to find who to ask for help, using a more formal mechanism is being proposed.
@gitster thanks for the pointers! I will see if I can add them either in this edition or in the next one.
@spectre10 thanks for the head up on this! @jnareb will likely include a link.
My links have landed in fe1564c .
Hey, I think part 2 of "So You Think You Know Git" can be incorporated in this edition: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Md44rcw13k4
@spectre10 , thanks for the link, it is included in the mentioned commit.
I wonder if the following link would be interesting to Git Rev News readers:
- Toy/demo: using ChatGPT to summarize lengthy LKML threads (b4 integration) thread on Linux kernel mailing list, started by Konstantin Ryabitsev.
I wonder if the following link would be interesting to Git Rev News readers:
Definitely an interesting thread. It seems worth including in this edition to me 👍🏼
I wonder if the following link would be interesting to Git Rev News readers:
Definitely an interesting thread. It seems worth including in this edition to me 👍🏼
Added in f512336 .
Draft email sent: https://lore.kernel.org/git/CAP8UFD25Dcz-Fk6wBaETX4G4OBucrexDqTd1jwH25tM3ixUhkg@mail.gmail.com/
Toy/demo: using ChatGPT to summarize lengthy LKML threads (b4 integration) thread on Linux kernel mailing list, started by Konstantin Ryabitsev.
It's very interesting to me at least. I hope I and others will be able to use something like this to help with writing articles for Git Rev News :-)
This comment in Linus Arver's interview:
Junio has been our maintainer for over a decade.
would probably be more accurately stated as:
Junio has been our maintainer for nearly two decades.
Also, in the same interview, the placement of the parentheses in:
a fairly (easy) way to fix things
seems odd; perhaps it should be:
a (fairly) easy way to fix things
Thanks @sunshineco for the greats spots! Corrected them in https://github.com/git/git.github.io/commit/78f1fef91bdfb49d53c423a0615a94fbfb0a0115
Added some tiny fixes and rephrasings in a6b3fa6 [1] , wondering if the "Releases" section should be sorted somehow.
[1] a6b3fa6 https://github.com/git/git.github.io/commit/a6b3fa68a568eccd5419d9278a8fb46b7ec2fe44
Added some tiny fixes and rephrasings in a6b3fa6 [1] , wondering if the "Releases" section should be sorted somehow.
[1] a6b3fa6 https://github.com/git/git.github.io/commit/a6b3fa68a568eccd5419d9278a8fb46b7ec2fe44
Under “Git: programmatic staging”, grepdiff by Tim Waugh (from Patchutils) is mentioned. Then under “Git tools and sites”, grepdiff by Russ Cox is mentioned. Is this a mistake or serendipity?
Under “Git: programmatic staging”, grepdiff by Tim Waugh (from Patchutils) is mentioned. Then under “Git tools and sites”, grepdiff by Russ Cox is mentioned. Is this a mistake or serendipity?
AFAICT it's neither. Just two different tools with the same name. (I've never used any of the two tools and checking their respective docs now it does seem that both could be applicable for the task described in the blog post, but it (as well as the lobste.rs comment) does link to (the man page of) the one from patchutils, not the Go one, so I see no mistake here.)
@mjaix thanks for the great fixes.
About sorting the Release section, there is some kind of order in it, as Git releases for example are always first. But I agree that we could maybe make it explicit or discuss it. Feel free to open an issue for that if you have some suggestions.
@LemmingAvalanche and @stepnem, it seems to me that these are indeed 2 different tools with the same name. Maybe we could just mention that. @jnareb what do you think?
Anyway I think we could do it after the edition is published so I will move forward with publishing it.
Edition published and announced in: https://lore.kernel.org/git/CAP8UFD2M1jXBh5Qqdyo48-N=nm2unqf=w7cN17NAX_Pc5z_qZQ@mail.gmail.com/
I just merged https://github.com/git/git.github.io/pull/704, but the merge was a bit complex as the file had been moved to the published location and there was another PR that I also merged in the meantime. Anyway everything should be fine.
For the note, in 6be0a6d3f94e1952697ef65fd35e8a344853cef3 I commented the "Various" sub-section of "Other News" since it didn't seem to have any news items.