mirror of
				https://github.com/django/django.git
				synced 2025-10-26 07:06:08 +00:00 
			
		
		
		
	
		
			
				
	
	
		
			247 lines
		
	
	
		
			10 KiB
		
	
	
	
		
			Plaintext
		
	
	
	
	
	
			
		
		
	
	
			247 lines
		
	
	
		
			10 KiB
		
	
	
	
		
			Plaintext
		
	
	
	
	
	
| ===============
 | |
| Committing code
 | |
| ===============
 | |
| 
 | |
| This section is addressed to the :ref:`committers` and to anyone interested in
 | |
| knowing how code gets committed into Django core. If you're a community member
 | |
| who wants to contribute code to Django, have a look at
 | |
| :doc:`writing-code/working-with-git` instead.
 | |
| 
 | |
| .. _handling-pull-requests:
 | |
| 
 | |
| Handling pull requests
 | |
| ======================
 | |
| 
 | |
| Since Django is now hosted at GitHub, most patches are provided in the form of
 | |
| pull requests.
 | |
| 
 | |
| When committing a pull request, make sure each individual commit matches the
 | |
| commit guidelines described below. Contributors are expected to provide the
 | |
| best pull requests possible. In practice however, committers - who will likely
 | |
| be more familiar with the commit guidelines - may decide to bring a commit up
 | |
| to standard themselves.
 | |
| 
 | |
| .. note::
 | |
| 
 | |
|     Before merging, but after reviewing, have Jenkins test the pull request by
 | |
|     commenting "buildbot, test this please" on the PR.
 | |
|     See our `Jenkins wiki page`_ for more details.
 | |
| 
 | |
| .. _Jenkins wiki page: https://code.djangoproject.com/wiki/Jenkins
 | |
| 
 | |
| An easy way to checkout a pull request locally is to add an alias to your
 | |
| ``~/.gitconfig`` (``upstream`` is assumed to be ``django/django``)::
 | |
| 
 | |
|     [alias]
 | |
|         pr = !sh -c \"git fetch upstream pull/${1}/head:pr/${1} && git checkout pr/${1}\"
 | |
| 
 | |
| Now you can simply run ``git pr ####`` to checkout the corresponding pull
 | |
| request.
 | |
| 
 | |
| At this point, you can work on the code. Use ``git rebase -i`` and ``git
 | |
| commit --amend`` to make sure the commits have the expected level of quality.
 | |
| Once you're ready:
 | |
| 
 | |
| .. code-block:: console
 | |
| 
 | |
|     $ # Pull in the latest changes from master.
 | |
|     $ git checkout master
 | |
|     $ git pull upstream master
 | |
|     $ # Rebase the pull request on master.
 | |
|     $ git checkout pr/####
 | |
|     $ git rebase master
 | |
|     $ git checkout master
 | |
|     $ # Merge the work as "fast-forward" to master to avoid a merge commit.
 | |
|     $ # (in practice, you can omit "--ff-only" since you just rebased)
 | |
|     $ git merge --ff-only pr/XXXX
 | |
|     $ # If you're not sure if you did things correctly, check that only the
 | |
|     $ # changes you expect will be pushed to upstream.
 | |
|     $ git push --dry-run upstream master
 | |
|     $ # Push!
 | |
|     $ git push upstream master
 | |
|     $ # Delete the pull request branch.
 | |
|     $ git branch -d pr/xxxx
 | |
| 
 | |
| For changes on your own branches, force push to your fork after rebasing on
 | |
| master but before merging and pushing to upstream. This allows the commit
 | |
| hashes on master and your branch to match which automatically closes the pull
 | |
| request. Since you can't push to other contributors' branches, comment on the
 | |
| pull request "Merged in XXXXXXX" (replacing with the commit hash) after you
 | |
| merge it. Trac checks for this message format to indicate on the ticket page
 | |
| whether or not a pull request is merged.
 | |
| 
 | |
| Avoid using GitHub's "Merge pull request" button on the website as it creates
 | |
| an ugly "merge commit" and makes navigating history more difficult.
 | |
| 
 | |
| When rewriting the commit history of a pull request, the goal is to make
 | |
| Django's commit history as usable as possible:
 | |
| 
 | |
| * If a patch contains back-and-forth commits, then rewrite those into one.
 | |
|   For example, if a commit adds some code and a second commit fixes stylistic
 | |
|   issues introduced in the first commit, those commits should be squashed
 | |
|   before merging.
 | |
| 
 | |
| * Separate changes to different commits by logical grouping: if you do a
 | |
|   stylistic cleanup at the same time as you do other changes to a file,
 | |
|   separating the changes into two different commits will make reviewing
 | |
|   history easier.
 | |
| 
 | |
| * Beware of merges of upstream branches in the pull requests.
 | |
| 
 | |
| * Tests should pass and docs should build after each commit. Neither the
 | |
|   tests nor the docs should emit warnings.
 | |
| 
 | |
| * Trivial and small patches usually are best done in one commit. Medium to
 | |
|   large work may be split into multiple commits if it makes sense.
 | |
| 
 | |
| Practicality beats purity, so it is up to each committer to decide how much
 | |
| history mangling to do for a pull request. The main points are engaging the
 | |
| community, getting work done, and having a usable commit history.
 | |
| 
 | |
| .. _committing-guidelines:
 | |
| 
 | |
| Committing guidelines
 | |
| =====================
 | |
| 
 | |
| In addition, please follow the following guidelines when committing code to
 | |
| Django's Git repository:
 | |
| 
 | |
| * Never change the published history of django/django branches! **Never force-
 | |
|   push your changes to django/django.** If you absolutely must (for security
 | |
|   reasons for example) first discuss the situation with the core team.
 | |
| 
 | |
| * For any medium-to-big changes, where "medium-to-big" is according to
 | |
|   your judgment, please bring things up on the |django-developers|
 | |
|   mailing list before making the change.
 | |
| 
 | |
|   If you bring something up on |django-developers| and nobody responds,
 | |
|   please don't take that to mean your idea is great and should be
 | |
|   implemented immediately because nobody contested it. Django's core
 | |
|   developers don't have a lot of time to read mailing-list discussions
 | |
|   immediately, so you may have to wait a couple of days before getting a
 | |
|   response.
 | |
| 
 | |
| * Write detailed commit messages in the past tense, not present tense.
 | |
| 
 | |
|   * Good: "Fixed Unicode bug in RSS API."
 | |
|   * Bad: "Fixes Unicode bug in RSS API."
 | |
|   * Bad: "Fixing Unicode bug in RSS API."
 | |
| 
 | |
|   The commit message should be in lines of 72 chars maximum. There should be
 | |
|   a subject line, separated by a blank line and then paragraphs of 72 char
 | |
|   lines. The limits are soft. For the subject line, shorter is better. In the
 | |
|   body of the commit message more detail is better than less::
 | |
| 
 | |
|       Fixed #18307 -- Added git workflow guidelines
 | |
| 
 | |
|       Refactored the Django's documentation to remove mentions of SVN
 | |
|       specific tasks. Added guidelines of how to use Git, GitHub, and
 | |
|       how to use pull request together with Trac instead.
 | |
| 
 | |
|   If the patch wasn't a pull request, you should credit the contributors in
 | |
|   the commit message: "Thanks A for report, B for the patch and C for the
 | |
|   review."
 | |
| 
 | |
| * For commits to a branch, prefix the commit message with the branch name.
 | |
|   For example: "[1.4.x] Fixed #xxxxx -- Added support for mind reading."
 | |
| 
 | |
| * Limit commits to the most granular change that makes sense. This means,
 | |
|   use frequent small commits rather than infrequent large commits. For
 | |
|   example, if implementing feature X requires a small change to library Y,
 | |
|   first commit the change to library Y, then commit feature X in a
 | |
|   separate commit. This goes a *long way* in helping all Django core
 | |
|   developers follow your changes.
 | |
| 
 | |
| * Separate bug fixes from feature changes. Bugfixes may need to be backported
 | |
|   to the stable branch, according to the :ref:`backwards-compatibility policy
 | |
|   <backwards-compatibility-policy>`.
 | |
| 
 | |
| * If your commit closes a ticket in the Django `ticket tracker`_, begin
 | |
|   your commit message with the text "Fixed #xxxxx", where "xxxxx" is the
 | |
|   number of the ticket your commit fixes. Example: "Fixed #123 -- Added
 | |
|   whizbang feature.". We've rigged Trac so that any commit message in that
 | |
|   format will automatically close the referenced ticket and post a comment
 | |
|   to it with the full commit message.
 | |
| 
 | |
|   If your commit closes a ticket and is in a branch, use the branch name
 | |
|   first, then the "Fixed #xxxxx." For example:
 | |
|   "[1.4.x] Fixed #123 -- Added whizbang feature."
 | |
| 
 | |
|   For the curious, we're using a `Trac plugin`_ for this.
 | |
| 
 | |
| .. note::
 | |
| 
 | |
|     Note that the Trac integration doesn't know anything about pull requests.
 | |
|     So if you try to close a pull request with the phrase "closes #400" in your
 | |
|     commit message, GitHub will close the pull request, but the Trac plugin
 | |
|     will also close the same numbered ticket in Trac.
 | |
| 
 | |
| .. _Trac plugin: https://github.com/trac-hacks/trac-github
 | |
| 
 | |
| * If your commit references a ticket in the Django `ticket tracker`_ but
 | |
|   does *not* close the ticket, include the phrase "Refs #xxxxx", where "xxxxx"
 | |
|   is the number of the ticket your commit references. This will automatically
 | |
|   post a comment to the appropriate ticket.
 | |
| 
 | |
| * Write commit messages for backports using this pattern::
 | |
| 
 | |
|     [<Django version>] Fixed <ticket> -- <description>
 | |
| 
 | |
|     Backport of <revision> from <branch>.
 | |
| 
 | |
|   For example::
 | |
| 
 | |
|     [1.3.x] Fixed #17028 -- Changed diveintopython.org -> diveintopython.net.
 | |
| 
 | |
|     Backport of 80c0cbf1c97047daed2c5b41b296bbc56fe1d7e3 from master.
 | |
| 
 | |
|   There's a `script on the wiki
 | |
|   <https://code.djangoproject.com/wiki/CommitterTips#AutomatingBackports>`_
 | |
|   to automate this.
 | |
| 
 | |
| Reverting commits
 | |
| =================
 | |
| 
 | |
| Nobody's perfect; mistakes will be committed.
 | |
| 
 | |
| But try very hard to ensure that mistakes don't happen. Just because we have a
 | |
| reversion policy doesn't relax your responsibility to aim for the highest
 | |
| quality possible. Really: double-check your work, or have it checked by
 | |
| another committer, **before** you commit it in the first place!
 | |
| 
 | |
| When a mistaken commit is discovered, please follow these guidelines:
 | |
| 
 | |
| * If possible, have the original author revert their own commit.
 | |
| 
 | |
| * Don't revert another author's changes without permission from the
 | |
|   original author.
 | |
| 
 | |
| * Use git revert -- this will make a reverse commit, but the original
 | |
|   commit will still be part of the commit history.
 | |
| 
 | |
| * If the original author can't be reached (within a reasonable amount
 | |
|   of time -- a day or so) and the problem is severe -- crashing bug,
 | |
|   major test failures, etc. -- then ask for objections on the
 | |
|   |django-developers| mailing list then revert if there are none.
 | |
| 
 | |
| * If the problem is small (a feature commit after feature freeze,
 | |
|   say), wait it out.
 | |
| 
 | |
| * If there's a disagreement between the committer and the
 | |
|   reverter-to-be then try to work it out on the |django-developers|
 | |
|   mailing list. If an agreement can't be reached then it should
 | |
|   be put to a vote.
 | |
| 
 | |
| * If the commit introduced a confirmed, disclosed security
 | |
|   vulnerability then the commit may be reverted immediately without
 | |
|   permission from anyone.
 | |
| 
 | |
| * The release branch maintainer may back out commits to the release
 | |
|   branch without permission if the commit breaks the release branch.
 | |
| 
 | |
| * If you mistakenly push a topic branch to django/django, just delete it.
 | |
|   For instance, if you did: ``git push upstream feature_antigravity``,
 | |
|   just do a reverse push: ``git push upstream :feature_antigravity``.
 | |
| 
 | |
| .. _ticket tracker: https://code.djangoproject.com/
 |