Skip to main content

Explore fork workflow

 

The forking workflow is fundamentally different than other popular Git workflows.

Instead of using a single server-side repository to act as the "central" codebase, it gives every developer their server-side repository.

It means that each contributor has two Git repositories:

  • A private local.
  • A public server-side.

The forking workflow is most often seen in public open-source projects.

The main advantage of the forking workflow is that contributions can be integrated without the need for everybody to push to a single central repository.

Developers push to their server-side repositories, and only the project maintainer can push to the official repository.

It allows the maintainer to accept commits from any developer without giving them written access to the official codebase.

The forking workflow typically will be intended for merging into the original project maintainer's repository.

The result is a distributed workflow that provides you a flexible way for large, organic teams (including untrusted third parties) to collaborate securely.

This also makes it an ideal workflow for open-source projects.

How it works

As in the other Git workflows, the forking workflow begins with an official public repository stored on a server.

But when a new developer wants to start working on the project, they don't directly clone the official repository.

Instead, they fork the official repository to create a copy of it on the server.

This new copy serves as their personal public repository—no other developers can push to it, but they can pull changes from it (we'll see why this is necessary in a moment).

After they've created their server-side copy, the developer does a git clone to get a copy of it onto their local machine.

It serves as their private development environment, just like in the other workflows.

When they're ready to publish a local commit, they push the commit to their public repository—not the official one.

Then, they file a pull request with the main repository, which lets the project maintainer know that an update is ready to be integrated.

The pull request also serves as a convenient discussion thread if there are issues with the contributed code.

The following is a step-by-step example of this workflow:

  • A developer 'forks' an 'official' server-side repository. It creates their server-side copy.
  • The new server-side copy is cloned to their local system.
  • A Git remote path for the 'official' repository is added to the local clone.
  • A new local feature branch is created.
  • The developer makes changes to the new branch.
  • New commits are created for the changes.
  • The branch gets pushed to the developer's server-side copy.
  • The developer opens a pull request from the new branch to the 'official' repository.
  • The pull request gets approved for merge and is merged into the original server-side repository.

To integrate the feature into the official codebase:

  • The maintainer pulls the contributor's changes into their local repository.
  • Checks to make sure it doesn't break the project.
  • Merges it into their local main branch.
  • Pushes the main branch to the official repository on the server.

The contribution is now part of the project, and other developers should pull from the official repository to synchronize their local repositories.

It's essential to understand that the notion of an "official" repository in the forking workflow is merely a convention.

The only thing that makes the official repository, so official is that it's the repository of the project maintainer.

Forking vs. cloning

It's essential to note that "forked" repositories and "forking" aren't special operations.

Forked repositories are created using the standard git clone command. Forked repositories are generally "server-side clones" managed and hosted by a Git service provider such as Azure Repos.

There's no unique Git command to create forked repositories.

A clone operation is essentially a copy of a repository and its history.

 

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

https://gengwg.blogspot.com/

Popular posts from this blog

OWASP Top 10 Threats and Mitigations Exam - Single Select

Last updated 4 Aug 11 Course Title: OWASP Top 10 Threats and Mitigation Exam Questions - Single Select 1) Which of the following consequences is most likely to occur due to an injection attack? Spoofing Cross-site request forgery Denial of service   Correct Insecure direct object references 2) Your application is created using a language that does not support a clear distinction between code and data. Which vulnerability is most likely to occur in your application? Injection   Correct Insecure direct object references Failure to restrict URL access Insufficient transport layer protection 3) Which of the following scenarios is most likely to cause an injection attack? Unvalidated input is embedded in an instruction stream.   Correct Unvalidated input can be distinguished from valid instructions. A Web application does not validate a client’s access to a resource. A Web action performs an operation on behalf of the user without checking a shared sec
2 comments
Read more

CKA Simulator Kubernetes 1.22

  https://killer.sh Pre Setup Once you've gained access to your terminal it might be wise to spend ~1 minute to setup your environment. You could set these: alias k = kubectl                         # will already be pre-configured export do = "--dry-run=client -o yaml"     # k get pod x $do export now = "--force --grace-period 0"   # k delete pod x $now Vim To make vim use 2 spaces for a tab edit ~/.vimrc to contain: set tabstop=2 set expandtab set shiftwidth=2 More setup suggestions are in the tips section .     Question 1 | Contexts Task weight: 1%   You have access to multiple clusters from your main terminal through kubectl contexts. Write all those context names into /opt/course/1/contexts . Next write a command to display the current context into /opt/course/1/context_default_kubectl.sh , the command should use kubectl . Finally write a second command doing the same thing into /opt/course/1/context_default_no_kubectl.sh , but without the use of k
Post a Comment
Read more

标 题: 关于Daniel Guo 律师

发信人: q123452017 (水天一色), 信区: I140 标  题: 关于Daniel Guo 律师 关键字: Daniel Guo 发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Thu Apr 26 02:11:35 2018, 美东) 这些是lz根据亲身经历在 Immigration版上发的帖以及一些关于Daniel Guo 律师的回 帖，希望大家不要被一些马甲帖广告帖所骗，慎重考虑选择律师。 WG 和Guo两家律师对比 1. fully refund的合约上的区别 wegreened家是case不过只要第二次没有file就可以fully refund。郭家是要两次case 没过才给refund，而且只要第二次pl draft好律师就可以不退任何律师费。 2. 回信速度 wegreened家一般24小时内回信。郭律师是在可以快速回复的时候才回复很快，对于需 要时间回复或者是不愿意给出确切答复的时候就回复的比较慢。 比如：lz问过郭律师他们律所在nsc区域最近eb1a的通过率，大家也知道nsc现在杀手如 云，但是郭律师过了两天只回复说让秘书update最近的case然后去网页上查，但是上面 并没有写明tsc还是nsc。 lz还问过郭律师关于准备ps （他要求的文件）的一些问题，模版上有的东西不是很清 楚，但是他一般就是把模版上的东西再copy一遍发过来。 3. 材料区别 （推荐信） 因为我只收到郭律师写的推荐信，所以可以比下两家推荐信 wegreened家推荐信写的比较长，而且每封推荐信会用不同的语气和风格，会包含lz写 的research summary里面的某个方面 郭家四封推荐信都是一个格式，一种语气，连地址，信的称呼都是一样的，怎么看四封 推荐信都是同一个人写出来的。套路基本都是第一段目的，第二段介绍推荐人，第三段 某篇或几篇文章的abstract，最后结论 4. 前期材料准备 wegreened家要按照他们的模版准备一个十几页的research summary。 郭律师在签约之前说的是只需要准备五页左右的summary，但是在lz签完约收到推荐信 ，郭律师又发来一个很长的ps要lz自己填，而且和pl的格式基本差不多。 总结下来，申请自己上心最重要。但是如果选律师，lz更倾向于wegreened，
Post a Comment
Read more