Gitit checkins in my repo?
Magnus Therning
repository (dataenc). Why are they there?
None of my other repos seems to have similar checkins, so why only in
the dataenc repo?
Thomas Hartman
http://patch-tag.com/r/magnus/dataenc/home
reports that this repo has no wiki associated with it.
I guess at some point in time patch-tag saw the wiki attributed
enabled, applied the wiki files, and then later the wiki attribute was
de-enabled but the files remained. (Wiki files are not automatically
deleted because the wiki interface is turned off.)
I would just delete the files and commit the deletes.
Did gitit files appear for anyone else?
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "patch-tag-users" group.
> To post to this group, send email to patch-t...@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to patch-tag-use...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/patch-tag-users?hl=en.
>
>
--
Need somewhere to put your code? http://patch-tag.com
Want to build a webapp? http://happstack.com
Magnus Therning
wrote:
>
> http://patch-tag.com/r/magnus/dataenc/home
>
> reports that this repo has no wiki associated with it.
>
> I guess at some point in time patch-tag saw the wiki attributed
> enabled, applied the wiki files, and then later the wiki attribute was
> de-enabled but the files remained. (Wiki files are not automatically
> deleted because the wiki interface is turned off.)
>
> I would just delete the files and commit the deletes.
darcs repo?
I find that surprising. A project wiki would be useful, but if it
infects the project's source repo then I would never use it.
/M
Thomas Hartman
> infects the project's source repo then I would never use it.
This is pretty much the idea of how gitit works :)
It has the advantages that
-- your documentation lives alongside the rest of your project
artifacts, and is versioned in sync
-- outsiders can provide documentation without being authorized to
send changes to more valuable project files. (if you keep the default
of uploads disabled, only .wiki files are editable via the gitit
interface.)
In terms of "infection" I am not sure how those gitit files came to be
in your case. It should not have happened, and as you said the rest of
your project repos didn't have this behavior.
However, if you don't like this workflow you should be able to disable
the gitit interface and (if you want to use patch-tag for wiki) just
create a separate project for wiki.
Magnus Therning
wrote:
>> the project's source repo then I would never use it.
>
> This is pretty much the idea of how gitit works :)
>
> It has the advantages that
> -- your documentation lives alongside the rest of your project artifacts,
> and is versioned in sync
> -- outsiders can provide documentation without being authorized to send
> changes to more valuable project files. (if you keep the default of uploads
> disabled, only .wiki files are editable via the gitit interface.)
Did you consider, but decide not to, put the wiki-related files in a
sub-directory? Why in that case?
Interestingly the other two online source hosting services I
occasionally use,
bitbucket and github, don't use the source repo for the wiki. It
could be
worth pointing out this behaviour on the repository settings page.
> In terms of "infection" I am not sure how those gitit files came to be
> in your case. It should not have happened, and as you said the rest of
> your project repos didn't have this behavior.
there was no
point in having one.
> However, if you don't like this workflow you should be able to disable the
> gitit interface and (if you want to use patch-tag for wiki) just create a
> separate project for wiki.
wiki in
another. There's not even a link from the former to the latter.
/M