feat: add --lite option for git-node land (makes it usable with repos other than nodejs/node)#546
feat: add --lite option for git-node land (makes it usable with repos other than nodejs/node)#546DeeDeeG wants to merge 1 commit intonodejs:mainfrom
--lite option for git-node land (makes it usable with repos other than nodejs/node)#546Conversation
Makes it possible to use `git-node land` in repositories other than `nodejs/node`. This is helpful for producing Node-style commit footers, and enforcing some Node PR/commit conventions.
|
yeah, could be a reasonable way to go, I still think moving away from this is probably the future for node-gyp, I tend to avoid pushing commits to nodejs/node these days because this process is getting more complex and onerous and the tooling probably only makes it more pleasant for frequent committers who have a good workflow and muscle memory for it. I'll try and find some time to try this on node-gyp and report back. |
|
Yeah, the more I use this, the more of a barrier I see it would be to contribution. I have shifted my attention mostly to understanding For the record:I tried this on my machine, and it worked for me. I didn't end up pushing the "landed" commit anywhere, but here is a screen recording of it: Demo.of.running.git-node.land.--lite.movNote to |
--lite option for git-node land--lite option for git-node land (makes it usable with repos other than nodejs/node)
Makes it possible to use
git-node landin repositories other thannodejs/node. This is helpful for producing Node-style commitfooters, and enforcing some Node PR/commit conventions.
Context: Looking into whether
git-node landcan be used for landing stuff at thenode-gyprepo. With this change, the answer would be "yes."See: nodejs/node-gyp#2286
cc @rvagg thoughts? (I like that
git-node landtakes some of the work out of using Node-style commit message prefixes, and maintaining commit message footers such asReviewed-By:andPR-URL:, but dropping all that and just usingrelease-pleaseand "conventional commit"-style commit messages would be even easier.)Note to
node-core-utilsmaintainers: Ifnode-gypmaintainers aren't interested in this--liteflag feature, then I don't think there is a real-world user for it. In that case, with no real-world users, I wouldn't recommend merging this. Basically, I can only see this being useful ifnode-gypmaintainers want it (or someone pops up in the comments here to say they want it).