Skip to main content

The Foolproof Git Setup

A confused Git user.
There was a recent complaint on Git User mailing list. Quote:
Why do I have to be a source control engineer just to be a software developer?
Now, the main issue of this poor person is that his organization has failed to on-board him into his job. They told him to use Git, but didn't give him the means to do so productively (as far as we know, anyway).

What I started wondering was: Could his employer somehow have set up Git for him so that he could work with it just as easily as with Subversion?

Given a prepared .gitconfig with all the aliases and configurations that you wanted, could you really dumb down Git so much that it would be analogous to the simpleness of SVN?

Well, here's my take on it: To a certain degree: yes. If you could narrow down Git to do the most typical two SVN commands:
  • update (pull without merging), and
  • commit (with push)
.. that would help a lot.

Dumbing down pull

The first step would be to make git pull as stupid as an svn update - always rebase local commits on top of the ones being fetched:

git config --global pull.rebase true

The above setup has a weakness though. If pull-rebase runs into a conflict, even if there is only one local commit to rebase -  you get stuck in rebase mode and you have to start figuring out what Git wants you to do. This is what it looks like (and I can see why newcomers still find Git scary when I look at this):

  ~/temp/bar/[master]>git pull
remote: Counting objects: 5, done.
remote: Compressing objects: 100% (3/3), done.
remote: Total 3 (delta 2), reused 0 (delta 0)
Unpacking objects: 100% (3/3), done.
From /Users/tfnico/temp/foo
   24b3b7f..4705398  master     -> origin/master
First, rewinding head to replay your work on top of it...
Applying: A random commit message: makeshiftness
Using index info to reconstruct a base tree...
M readme.txt
Falling back to patching base and 3-way merge...
Auto-merging readme.txt
CONFLICT (content): Merge conflict in readme.txt
Failed to merge in the changes.
Patch failed at 0001 A random commit message: makeshiftness
The copy of the patch that failed is found in:
   /Users/tfnico/temp/bar/.git/rebase-apply/patch

When you have resolved this problem, run "git rebase --continue".
If you prefer to skip this patch, run "git rebase --skip" instead.
To check out the original branch and stop rebasing, run "git rebase --abort".

That's a lot of text for one little conflict.

While SVN will present all conflicts at once, Git will insist you handle them one commit at a time, which is nicer, but still enters you into rebase-mode where you have to go git rebase --continue when conflicts have been resolved.

So, until I can figure out a way around that, you'll have to teach your newcomer at least enough to be able to resolve conflicts, do git add <resolved file> and git rebase --continue.

OR, we go back to the drawing board.

There must be a better way

I realized this after trying to publish this blog-post, and by the time I realized it hadn't gone live, I had a better idea.

What if we just squash all local commits into being changes in the work tree?

We could make an alias: git update - which does the following

  1. git reset --soft origin/master
  2. git stash
  3. git pull
  4. git stash pop
This would essentially guarantee that any conflicts occur after we pop the stash. This is essentially the same behavior as SVN update. Here's the alias:

git config alias.update "!git reset --soft origin/master && git stash && git pull && git stash pop"

Of course this would mean that we lose the commit messages of any local commits, but that wouldn't be a problem if we also implemented the next step:

Some very pushy commits


Next up, I would imitate svn commit by automatically pushing after each commit by configuring up this post-commit hook (in .git/hooks/post-commit):

#!/bin/sh
git push

Voila. Every commit is immediately pushed away, and if there are remote changes, you have to update first. Just like in SVN.

(I know SVN will allow you to commit anyway if there are no conflicts, but I don't think that's a good idea. We could actually script our way into this too, by detecting the rejection, doing an update, and then commit again with the same commit message unless there are any conflicts.).

That's it

These two adaptions would actually go a long way, until the user wants to get into stuff like branching, and by that time he should be ready to learn to use Git properly anyway.

We could maybe alias git add to git resolve. We could also maybe wrap Git in a script and somehow capture the output messages to make them more readable and SVN-like. In the end, I guess there's also a limit to how much energy we should put into making training wheels for people..

Oh, on a final note, there's an old related project called EasyGit. They wrap Git itself and provide a smoother experience for people coming from SVN. They're not as hardline as my two adaptions above though.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Open source CMS evaluations

I have now seen three more or less serious open source CMS reviews. First guy to hit the field was Matt Raible ( 1 2 3 4 ), ending up with Drupal , Joomla , Magnolia , OpenCms and MeshCMS being runner-ups. Then there is OpenAdvantage that tries out a handful ( Drupal , Exponent CMS , Lenya , Mambo , and Silva ), including Plone which they use for their own site (funny/annoying that the entire site has no RSS-feeds, nor is it possible to comment on the articles), following Matt's approach by exluding many CMS that seem not to fit the criteria. It is somewhat strange that OpenAdvantage cuts away Magnolia because it "Requires J2EE server; difficult to install and configure; more of a framework than CMS", and proceed to include Apache Lenya in the full evaluation. Magnolia does not require a J2EE server. It runs on Tomcat just like Lenya does (maybe it's an idea to bundle Magnolia with Jetty to make it seem more lightweight). I'm still sure that OpenAdvant

What I've Learned After a Month of Podcasting

So, it's been about a month since I launched   GitMinutes , and wow, it's been a fun ride. I have gotten a lot of feedback, and a lot more downloads/listeners than I had expected! Judging the numbers is hard, but a generous estimate is that somewhere around 2000-3000 have listened to the podcast, and about 500-1000 regularly download. Considering that only a percentage of my target audience actively listen to podcasts, these are some pretty good numbers. I've heard that 10% of the general population in the western world regularly listen to podcasts (probably a bit higher percentage among Git users), so I like to think I've reached a big chunk of the Git pros out there. GitMinutes has gathered 110 followers on Twitter, and 63, erm.. circlers on Google+, and it has received 117 +'es! And it's been flattr'ed twice :) Here are some of the things I learned during this last month: Conceptually.. Starting my own sandbox podcast for trying out everythin

Encrypting and Decrypting with Spring

I was recently working with protecting some sensitive data in a typical Java application with a database underneath. We convert the data on its way out of the application using Spring Security Crypto Utilities . It "was decided" that we'd be doing AES with a key-length of 256 , and this just happens to be the kind of encryption Spring crypto does out of the box. Sweet! The big aber is that whatever JRE is running the application has to be patched with Oracle's JCE  in order to do 256 bits. It's a fascinating story , the short version being that U.S. companies are restricted from exporting various encryption algorithms to certain countries, and some countries are restricted from importing them. Once I had patched my JRE with the JCE, I found it fascinating how straight forward it was to encrypt and decrypt using the Spring Encryptors. So just for fun at the weekend, I threw together a little desktop app that will encrypt and decrypt stuff for the given password

The academical approach

Oops, seems I to published this post prematurely by hitting some Blogger keyboard shortcut. I've been sitting for some minutes trying to figure out how to approach the JavaZone talk mentioned in my previous blog-post. Note that I have already submitted an abstract to the comittee, and that I won't publish the abstract here in the blog. Now of course the abstract is pretty detailed on what the talk is going to be about, but I've still got some elbow room on how to "implement" the talk. I will use this blog as a tool to get my aim right on how to present the talk, what examples to include, what the slides should look like, and how to make it most straightforward and understandable for the audience. Now in lack of having done any presentations at a larger conference before, I'm gonna dig into what I learned at the University, which wasn't very much, but they did teach me how to write a research paper, a skill which I will adapt into creating my talk: The one

Git Stash Blooper (Could not restore untracked files from stash)

The other day I accidentally did a git stash -a , which means it stashes *everything*, including ignored output files (target, build, classes, etc). Ooooops.. What I meant to do was git stash -u , meaning stash modifications plus untracked new files. Anyhows, I ended up with a big fat stash I couldn't get back out. Each time I tried, I got something like this: .../target/temp/dozer.jar already exists, no checkout .../target/temp/core.jar already exists, no checkout .../target/temp/joda-time.jar already exists, no checkout .../target/foo.war already exists, no checkout Could not restore untracked files from stash No matter how I tried checking out different revisions (like the one where I actually made the stash), or using --force, I got the same error. Now these were one of those "keep cool for a second, there's a git way to fix this"situation. I figured: A stash is basically a commit. If we look at my recent commits using   git log --graph --