squash | The debugger for microservices | REST library

by solo-io Go Version: v0.5.19 License: Apache-2.0

X-Ray Key Features Code Snippets Community Discussions(10)Vulnerabilities Install Support

kandi X-RAY | squash Summary

squash is a Go library typically used in Web Services, REST, Docker applications. squash has no bugs, it has no vulnerabilities, it has a Permissive License and it has medium support. You can download it from GitHub.

The debugger for microservices

Support

Quality

Security

License

Reuse

Support

squash has a medium active ecosystem.

It has 1713 star(s) with 106 fork(s). There are 92 watchers for this library.

It had no major release in the last 12 months.

There are 83 open issues and 61 have been closed. On average issues are closed in 25 days. There are 6 open pull requests and 0 closed requests.

It has a neutral sentiment in the developer community.

The latest version of squash is v0.5.19

Quality

squash has no bugs reported.

Security

squash has no vulnerabilities reported, and its dependent libraries have no vulnerabilities reported.

License

squash is licensed under the Apache-2.0 License. This license is Permissive.

Permissive licenses have the least restrictions, and you can use them in most projects.

Reuse

squash releases are available to install and integrate.

Top functions reviewed by kandi - BETA

kandi's functional review helps you automatically verify the functionalities of the libraries and avoid rework.
Currently covering the most popular Java, JavaScript and Python libraries. See a Sample of squash

Get all kandi verified functions for this library.

squash Key Features

No Key Features are available at this moment for squash.

squash Examples and Code Snippets

No Code Snippets are available at this moment for squash.

Community Discussions

Trending Discussions on squash

How to read this modified unet?

How to overwrite local history with remote?

How could a commit on remote survive a forced push?

Get rid of several bad commits

Git rebase multiple merges/branches

How does GitLab merge request with squash work under the hood?

is it possible to squash commits via Github API?

GIt diff two hashes, show repo file size difference

Timestamps on git commits after rebase?

Git Flow Confusion On Release Branch

QUESTION

How to read this modified unet?

Asked 2021-Jun-11 at 17:50

import numpy as np
import torch
import torch.nn as nn
import torch.nn.functional as F
import torchvision
from PIL import Image
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt

class Model_Down(nn.Module):
    """
    Convolutional (Downsampling) Blocks.

    nd = Number of Filters
    kd = Kernel size

    """
    def __init__(self,in_channels, nd = 128, kd = 3, padding = 1, stride = 2):
        super(Model_Down,self).__init__()
        self.padder = nn.ReflectionPad2d(padding)
        self.conv1 = nn.Conv2d(in_channels = in_channels, out_channels = nd, kernel_size = kd, stride = stride)
        self.bn1 = nn.BatchNorm2d(nd)

        self.conv2 = nn.Conv2d(in_channels = nd, out_channels = nd, kernel_size = kd, stride = 1)
        self.bn2 = nn.BatchNorm2d(nd)

        self.relu = nn.LeakyReLU()

    def forward(self, x):
        x = self.padder(x)
        x = self.conv1(x)
        x = self.bn1(x)
        x = self.relu(x)
        x = self.padder(x)
        x = self.conv2(x)
        x = self.bn2(x)
        x = self.relu(x)
        return x

...

ANSWER

Answered 2021-Jun-11 at 17:50

Here is a functional equivalent of the main Model forward(x) method. It is much more verbose, but it is "unravelling" the flow of operations, making it more easily understandable.

I assumed that the length of the list-arguments are always 5 (i is in the [0, 4] range, inclusive) so I could unpack properly (and it follows the default set of parameters).

Source https://stackoverflow.com/questions/67936380

QUESTION

How to overwrite local history with remote?

Asked 2021-Jun-06 at 21:06

Recently I had to squash commits due to several bad commits. Simply doing git pull --rebase origin master worked for me but my teammate already had merged new history on top of old history. So I want to know is if it is possible to overwrite local history?

Let's say there are three timelines in branches remoteNew, localOld and localNew has hour old commit.

Following works and completely overwrites old history with new history. Though thing to note here is, oldHistory had no new commits after newHistory was created.

...

ANSWER

Answered 2021-Jun-06 at 21:05

To overwrite local history with remote history, will remove all files, where are only on local history. So be carefully!

Source https://stackoverflow.com/questions/67863536

QUESTION

How could a commit on remote survive a forced push?

Asked 2021-Jun-02 at 16:08

I leak a credentials on a file in my feature branch. A reviewer caught the mistake, showing the hash commit, lets call it a6859b6, when the bad info was introduced and asked me to safely remove. I edited the file, squashed all commits in my branch and forced push.

Then the PR got approved, and merged into master. My branch is deleted on remote and locally. The commit log of master doesn't show any presence of the "bad" commit a6859b6

Surprisingly, querying remote on the exact commit hash https://gitlab.com/blabla/-/commit/a6859b6 still show the offending code.

Is it by design? How do we call this kind of "orphan" commits? What does git do with these and is it possible to purge a specific orphan commit?

EDIT: GitLab answered to my support ticket

Advise to rotate the leak creds.
GitLab has a housekeeping process which prunes the loose commits on the remote repo automatically every 2 weeks

...

ANSWER

Answered 2021-May-31 at 18:57

Is it by design?

Yes, git does not instantly delete objects once they are not referenced. This may be done eventually by the GC (git gc). Not instantly removing such references makes it easy for you to recover lost data using git reflog (as long as you have added/committed the data previously).

How do we call this kind of "orphan" commits?

You can call them loose objects/commit. This name is also used in the docs.

What does git do with these and is it possible to purge a specific orphan commit?

Git may eventually decide to clean these up (depending on gc.auto). This can also be done manually by running git gc --prune=now in the repository where you want to remove it (you need shell access). If you have a long reference chain referencing the object that is not referenced any more, you may want to add --aggressive: git gc --aggressive --prune=now.

If you don't have direct access, you could mirror the repository, run git gc --prune=now, delete the remote repository, recreate an empty repository and push everything from your local mirror.

Anyways, I would strongly recommend you to change/invalidate the leaked credentials as soon as possible as people could already have downloaded your commit (and the reviewer has seen those, too). When you are sure that your leaked credentials are not valid anywhere, you don't need to worry about unreferenced commits.

Source https://stackoverflow.com/questions/67778781

QUESTION

Get rid of several bad commits

Asked 2021-Jun-02 at 13:29

I have repo where I don't track .gitignore, someone committed node_modules folder and later we decided to untrack it. Now same person(new to git) committed '.gitignore' for few commits before untracking it again. Now we have situation where if we checkout old commits, it deletes several files from repo that were not tracked and it also creates situation where 'vs code' slows down due to thousands of untracked files. What's the best way to handle this situation? I think I will need to squash those commits and keep them on seperate branch so no one checks it out accidentally. Do I have any other options?

As things happened,

...

ANSWER

Answered 2021-Jun-02 at 13:29

Form what you have described top of master is fixed and problem is only is someone checks out old version of code where stuff are broken.

There is no easy way to fix it. For that you need rewrite whole history and make sure that all copies of repository are updated with new history. This is organization nightmare you will always miss one repo which will be pushed back to main repository and you will come back to initial state. So do not try that.

The only reasonable solution is address scenario when someone checks out old version of code. If this is some branch, like: release-1.x.x then just cherry pick a commit which fixes this issue to that branch.

If developers have to checkout code to specific version/commit, they have to live with this problem as long this version of code needs some maintenance.

Important is to learn some lesson from this kind of problems:

always create and check in .gitignore to repository when only you start new project.
git hooks are a bit harder to configure, but are great solution to protect repo from unwanted corruptions
- note there are tools github/gitlab/bitbucket/... which allows you to configure pull requests and configure git hooks to protect specific branches. Passing pull request code review is great way to protect you from unexpected (not covered by .gitignore and git hooks) bad changes
when intern is joining a project make sure his git skills are at least a basic and he understands what should be tracked by repository and what should not be tracked.

Source https://stackoverflow.com/questions/67805492

QUESTION

Git rebase multiple merges/branches

Asked 2021-May-30 at 22:52

I have a scenario where I have made a branch off master, lets call it A, made some changes. Then had to branch off A, let call it B, and made some more changes. I then merged B into A, so now A has both the commits from A and B.

I now need to rebase branch A onto master and squash the commit from branch B, but when I do this I lose all the changes that were on branch B and only the changes from branch A are there.

I am wondering how do I rebase onto master squash the commits and still have all the changes?

...

ANSWER

Answered 2021-May-30 at 22:52

If you want to squash the commits from B, then:

rebase B onto A first
squash B so now it is a single (or similar) commit on top of A
rebase A onto master

Source https://stackoverflow.com/questions/67766208

QUESTION

How does GitLab merge request with squash work under the hood?

Asked 2021-May-29 at 12:32

On a daily basis I am working with GitLab with following workflow:

I create a new feature branch from main branch
I commit and push changes to the feature branch
Then I create a new merge request (from feature into main) via GitLab GUI using squash feature:
When approver accept my MR, it results with following main branch tree (from IntellJ IDEA):

I have tried to achieve the same on my testing repository using command line only but with no success so far. I have tried (on feature branch) interactive rebase as well as soft reset with force push but it always results as a 'single line tree'. Example after two separate merges from feature into main:

...

ANSWER

Answered 2021-May-29 at 12:15

Simply use merge without fast-forward:

Source https://stackoverflow.com/questions/67751118

QUESTION

is it possible to squash commits via Github API?

Asked 2021-May-28 at 09:41

I've successfully implemented automatic file creation/update via Github V3 Rest API, however the only downside is that for each file I have a commit.

There is a possibility to do the same for multiple files, but unfortunately it involves some concepts I still haven't mastered and it will take me some time until I get there since I have more urgents stuff on my TODO list.

In the meanwhile, I can totally live with that or simply squash the last N commits, which I imagined should be relatively easy, since locally it's just a matter of

...

ANSWER

Answered 2021-May-11 at 07:41

I did not see a squash feature directly through API.

You would need to:

create a branch at HEAD-N commits, through the create ref API
reset your current branch to HEAD-N sha, with force boolean parameter set to true?
create a pull request from your new branch to your old reset branch
merge the PR, with the merge_method parameter set to squash

Pretty convoluted, but it should work (entirely through script, without having to clone the repository).

Source https://stackoverflow.com/questions/67477142

QUESTION

GIt diff two hashes, show repo file size difference

Asked 2021-May-28 at 07:52

If new people are using git sometimes they add files, and delete files on their branch, not realizing the deleted files stay in the history.

How does one protect the deleted files from going into the main / dev branch, and increasing the repo size.

I realize squashing the commits would do this, but is there a way to git diff and show deleted / undeleted files on their branch to detect this?

...

ANSWER

Answered 2021-May-28 at 07:52

If you intend to take each new commit from someone who offers you 50 commits (or any other number than 1), you must inspect each new commit. There is no Royal Road to this: it requires inspecting each commit.

If you intend to use git merge --squash or similar to convert all 50 of their commits into a single, new, different commit that just produces the same end result, then you can review the changes as a single change that produces the same end result, since that's what you will add to your repository.

That's really all there is to this. Pick what you are going to do, and review accordingly.

Source https://stackoverflow.com/questions/67723736

QUESTION

Timestamps on git commits after rebase?

Asked 2021-May-27 at 01:02

I'm trying to undo my bad git practices from times past and in doing so, I want to get a list of commits to specific files, newer than a certain timestamp (older commits to these files were cherry-picked to the master branch, which I now realise was a very bad idea, considering that the originating branch was nowhere near finished). Illustrated simplified:

...

ANSWER

Answered 2021-May-27 at 01:02

Every commit has two date-and-time stamps. One is called the author date and one is called the committer date.

When you make a new commit in the usual way, using git commit and no trickery, both are set to the same value. Git retrieves the current time from your computer clock, and if that's accurate, the new commit's two date-stamps are "now".

When you make a commit using git cherry-pick or something that internally uses the cherry-pick machinery (such as git rebase), Git normally preserves the original author of the commit, and the original author-date. You become the committer, and "now" is the committer date.

To see both time stamps with git log, use any of the formatting options that prints both. The simplest to use is git log --pretty=fuller.

The --since and --until (or --after and --before) options to git log use the committer date only. (I think there should be a way to specify author dates, but there isn't.)

Source https://stackoverflow.com/questions/67709162

QUESTION

Git Flow Confusion On Release Branch

Asked 2021-May-25 at 22:45

I am trying to understand one thing in git flow. Lets assume we have branch tree like this

In this scenario I merged my release branch by opening a PR to master and dev separately. I merged PRs with using

...

ANSWER

Answered 2021-May-25 at 21:12

How can I get same HEAD for master and dev after merge?

You can't. Well, technically you could, but you probably don't want to.

A branch in git points to a commit; that commit points to other commits, back through history. Each of those commits is identified by a unique hash; if two different commits had the same hash, everything would be horribly broken. That hash covers both the contents of the repository, and all the metadata of the commit, including what parents it has.

So if two different branches point at the same hash, those branches are identical - not just identical in their current content, but identical in their entire history.

The only way for that to happen is to always use "fast-forward" merges, everywhere, so that all your branches are actually just pointers in a single line of commits. In practice, that means rebasing things, a lot - for instance, every hotfix will probably require rebasing the whole of develop, and then rebasing all open feature branches onto that new develop.

That's a lot of work, and a lot of things that can go wrong, to avoid this:

I had to merge an empty commit with no diff.

Git was smart enough to recognise that no actual changes were needed, even though you'd merged two unrelated commits (remember: a squash merge throws away all history on the feature branch). That is it solving the problem for you.

The other solution, as pointed out in comments, is not to merge the feature to two places in the first place. Merge release to master, and then merge master to develop.

Source https://stackoverflow.com/questions/67694944

Community Discussions, Code Snippets contain sources that include Stack Exchange Network