gh-review

by Dica-Developer JavaScript Version: v0.6.0 License: No License

X-Ray Key Features Code Snippets Community Discussions(1)Vulnerabilities Install Support

kandi X-RAY | gh-review Summary

gh-review is a JavaScript library. gh-review has no bugs, it has no vulnerabilities and it has low support. You can download it from GitHub.

gh-review

Support

Quality

Security

License

Reuse

Support

gh-review has a low active ecosystem.

It has 4 star(s) with 2 fork(s). There are 12 watchers for this library.

It had no major release in the last 12 months.

There are 29 open issues and 83 have been closed. On average issues are closed in 92 days. There are no pull requests.

It has a neutral sentiment in the developer community.

The latest version of gh-review is v0.6.0

Quality

gh-review has no bugs reported.

Security

gh-review has no vulnerabilities reported, and its dependent libraries have no vulnerabilities reported.

License

gh-review does not have a standard license declared.

Check the repository for any license declaration and review the terms closely.

Without a license, all rights are reserved, and you cannot use the library in your applications.

Reuse

gh-review releases are available to install and integrate.

Installation instructions, examples and code snippets are available.

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 gh-review

Get all kandi verified functions for this library.

gh-review Key Features

No Key Features are available at this moment for gh-review.

gh-review Examples and Code Snippets

No Code Snippets are available at this moment for gh-review.

Community Discussions

Trending Discussions on gh-review

Git and GitHub concepts: Reviewing updated pull requests locally

QUESTION

Git and GitHub concepts: Reviewing updated pull requests locally

Asked 2018-Apr-11 at 06:46

I follow the generic OSS structure:

the OSS' remote repository hosted on GitHub
a fork of the OSS remote repository to my own remote repository
a clone of the fork on my remote repository to create a local repository

Thus, a contributor would create a new branch locally, push the changes to his/her remote repository, and then open a pull request to the OSS' remote repository.

This has been working well. However, the main issue comes when I try to review another contributor's pull request by fiddling with it locally.

So I have fetched a pull request made to the OSS' remote repository using this command:

git fetch upstream pull//head:

followed by git checkout

and it was successful. I played around with the PR, and reviewed it on GitHub. Then, the contributor updated the PR by pushing new commits to their branch (on their remote repo), which was automatically reflected in the PR.

Now, I want to be able to get the updates locally so that I can try the changes again. I understand that my copy of the PR branch does not track the remote branch by default, so I tried to set it to track the PR:

git branch --set-upstream upstream/pull//head:

like how I have done when I first fetched the branch. However, I got the response that

error: the requested upstream branch 'pull//head:' does not exist

I tried again with:

git branch --set-upstream-to upstream/pull//head:

which also failed with the same error.

Then, I thought, is it because a PR is like a 'reflection' of the branch on someone's remote repository, so if I want to track an upstream branch I should track from the person's remote repository?

So I added the contributors' remote repository as a remote, and tried again:

git branch --set-upstream-to

and I still faced the same error.

I did some Googling, and I found this, but I do not want to get all the pull requests. I also found links like this one but nope, not the help that I need there.

Can anyone point out what is wrong with the way that I am doing things now? Thanks!

Edit: Is there an easier way to do things aside from what has been proposed by Marina Liu - MSFT below?

...

ANSWER

Answered 2018-Apr-11 at 06:38

The problem—or at least the first one—here is that you cannot use an upstream to refer to a GitHub pull request reference.

In Git, an upstream on a branch consists of two parts:

The name of a remote, such as origin
The name of a branch on that remote, such as master

Git puts these two together to get refs/heads/master—this is the name on the remote—then runs this string through the fetch setting(s) for the remote. The standard fetch setting for the remote named origin is +refs/heads/*:refs/remotes/origin/*, so if the upstream is currently set to the pair <origin, master>, the name that Git looks up in your own repository is refs/remotes/origin/master, which is your remote-tracking name for their master.

Note the assumption in here that the name on the remote begins with refs/heads/.

The actual name of a pull reference on GitHub begins with refs/pull/, not refs/heads/, so that the full name of the commit you want for pull request #123 is refs/pull/123/head. There is no way to spell this that starts with refs/heads/ because this is not a branch name.

Now, you can—as suggested in your first link—add an extra fetch setting:

Source https://stackoverflow.com/questions/49767697

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

Vulnerabilities

No vulnerabilities reported

Install gh-review

After installing node.js, you have to run the following commands:.
To build a distribution run the following commands corresponding to your operating system:.

Support

For any new features, suggestions and bugs create an issue on GitHub. If you have any questions check and ask questions on community page Stack Overflow .

Find more information at: