This might be a basic github question, but I'm having trouble finding the right keywords to google because I don't know the terminology. Apologies and thanks in advance.
I've noticed with library dependencies in library.json, under "dependencies", there is often a github remote repo link with a version number after the #
For example
https://github.com/codewitch-honey-crisis/htcw_ili9341.git#1.0.0"
What is that exactly after the #? A branch? A release?
More importantly, how do I make my github repo expose these. Like, I want to make a 1.0.0 one now for htcw_ili9341.git but later I may want to make 1.0.1
Using the github website, and/or the command line, how do I go about this?
It would be really helpful if you explained as you went as well.
So you know where I'm coming from with this, I've been using github for awhile but only for the most basic things, and driving it all through VS Code for the most part, sometimes resorting to the web interface and only occasionally dropping to the command line, which I've done a handful of times to resolve merge conflicts. I'm not an expert, but not completely new to it either.
anything after # is never posted to the server. It's basically a comment in this specific instance.
Related
Hello I'm new to Github/Gist and I want to use this code, but I need to modify it a little bit. Can i just fork this code and modify it to use it for my own projects? Or do i have to link to the author etc.? Here is the link: https://gist.github.com/learncodeacademy/777349747d8382bfb722
Thank you!
Github repositories are meant to be forked. You don't have to ask an author for permission. Anyway, the gist you linked to has already been forked 30 times.
When you are using a forked repository.It shows up as "forked from xyz". So attribution is automatic. But if you want to, you can always give an extra credit to the author by mentioning it specifically.
Forking a repository on Github, creates an individual copy of the code. This feature is meant to encourage collaboration as well as allow you to experiment with the repositories code. Forking can be used to propose new changes to someone else's code or jumpstart an idea or a new project. As the repository was created by someone else, it is always important to understand the limitations of using their code for your own projects (especially if you plan on selling this product). Every repository created on Github has the chance to create a license file. This file will tell you what you can or cannot do with the forked code. Often open source code is meant to be used and shared with everyone, but it is still good to check. Here is Githubs documentation on forking repositories: https://help.github.com/articles/fork-a-repo/. For more information on licensing files see http://choosealicense.com/. Github gists follow the same standard. If you are still worried, it does not hurt to contact the owner of the repository and verify that you can use it for your own projects.
The point of open sourcing code on GitHub is for others to take and use for themselves and learn from it. Also, like fuchsteufelswild said, when forking on GitHub it automatically gives credit to the author so you should be good.
Is there any documentation out there to suggest that GitHub issues are eternal? More specifically, are their URIs reliable to link to?
E.g., I want to link to a Joda-Time issue in a Javadoc to give context as to why a custom de/serializer was necessary. If the link is reliably static I'll be comfortable referencing it in code.
Yes
Git issues are completly reliable, no one can remove an issue, even repository's administrators.
A git issue will never die, the worst thing that can happen to an issue is getting locked, resulting in others not being able to comment on them, but still, it's visible to everyone.
Edit: Please note that by removing a repository, all it's issues, pull requests, wiki pages, etc. are removed. More about forks on this.
The google dat.gui is a great little interface. http://workshop.chromeexperiments.com/examples/gui/#1--Basic-Usage
I really want to use this on a new project, but it doesn't work properly on touch screen devices.
However, since they migrated it from Github to code.google.com, things seems to have stalled and issues are going unfixed.
Being brutally honest, I think the project would have more community contribution if it were back on Github. Could I fork it and create my own version, called something like dat.gui MkII, and encourage people to contribute to my version on github? The problem however, is I don't want things to get diluted and create confusion. Would it be better just to completely rebrand it away from dat.gui, and say it was originally forked from there?
Apply a
Cost–benefit analysis
to forking the project.
Cost
forking could dilute the project and create confusion
Benefit
could renew interest in the project and result in more issues being fixed
In my opinion it is worth it, you could alleviate some confusion by having a detailed README on your homepage decribing the situation and/or linking here.
I've looked everywhere but I can't find any way to post code to GitHub. I tried making a repository but then it tells me I have to download a command prompt thing?
Why can't I just post code directly to it? Is there any other way?
If you are simply looking for a way to put some code online, then you can use another feature of that site calles "gists".
If you are on a mac, then there is another app you can use (made by the GitHub guys).
But the most relevant piece of software is what you refer to as " command prompt thing", which is a version control application with a relatively steep learning curve called GIT.
On a final note you might be misunderstanding what GitHub is useful for and might be better off looking at something a bit less complicated. If you are willing to explain exactly what you are looking for then i'm sure the StackOverflow community will be willing to help you :)
You may use github's gist.
Although, the main point of using github is to share git repositories.
While GitHub has recently added limited support for editing files through the web interface, it's intended as hosting for software projects using the Git source control software. The most-used interface is the command-line git tool, though there are graphical interfaces such as TortoiseGit as well as Git components for many IDEs.
If all you're looking for is a place to put small code fragments for sending to others (like a pastebin), then you probably want Gists instead: http://gist.github.com/
Github is a code hosting site for Git.
The "command prompt thingy" is likely Git. If you don't use Git, it's unlikely you want Github either.
Luckily there are graphical Git front ends such as SmartGit.
We have a fairly large project, and I've decided that Google Code is not quite living up to expectations. Github looks like a much more suitable platform -- but I feel like there's no escape for us. Is it a case of migrating stuff over manually? We're using svn currently, so I understand that we'll need to move to git somehow - is this going to be possible considering that I don't have admin access to our repository? Also, I know this is subjective and I don't want to start a holy war, but please also comment on your feelings about Google Code vs Github. Should we also be considering SourceForge?
I've used all, and now I am using github and I am completely satisfied. Sourceforge had annoying ads and was slow, google code didn't have the features I wanted/needed.
As for moving to github, they have a guide here, the process should be quite simple:
http://help.github.com/svn-importing/
We're using svn currently, so I understand that we'll need to move to git somehow - is this going to be possible considering that I don't have admin access to our repository?
Nope, you can use git svn to convert a repo, even if you don't have admin access. Here's a good tutorial (from one of the GitHub guys, no doubt) that explains how to convert an SVN repo to Git (including how to migrate tags and branches properly, which git-svn doesn't do very well).
but please also comment on your feelings about Google Code vs Github.
I've never used Google Code for personal projects. I know from a visitor's standpoint, I like the interface and tools used by GitHub a lot better.
Should we also be considering SourceForge?
Ugh... I personally think SourceForge is probably the worst of the free source code hosting facilities nowadays.
I think before you go through all the work to migrate to github (which is great yes) I would consider what your problem actually is. If it is just that you are using svn and that is not a distributed version control system you could just migrate your google code repository to be HG (Mercurial) based and you would get all the benefits of a distributed version control system but could otherwise stay at google code (which has great features that github does not have as well..)
Google announced today that they're closing Google Code. They added a migration tool to export projects to GitHub, it just takes one click.