I've almost done my first big project in React+Typescript+Redux and started it on Firebase with users and some database conneted with logged users.
It was supposed to be my project to portfolio before looking for my first dev job, but it start to be very complex.
Now I have idea to use it in the future to make commercial app.
So the problem is I don't want to publish my code on github, but at the same time I want to publish all my commits and repository description on Github for recrutiers (and all my tasks from trello table). Is it possible to publish only commits and description from github repository?
No, this is not possible. If your repository is public, anyone can clone the entire repository. The only way to make your code inaccessible is to make the repository private, which means nobody can see it without having permssion.
Related
We are a small team doing our own project and we need to somehow add a repository to each participant, so that later we can show what we did, how can this be done correctly?
We tried to google but did not really understand how to do it, leaving just a link like 'I took part in this project' seems to us not such a right decision
You need to set up a central, bare repository and have everyone clone that. Then they push and pull from that central repository to stay coordinated. There are various workflows of which the feature branch workflow is a good place to start.
Rather than doing this yourself, it's much simpler to host your code on a service such as Gitlab or Github. Both offer private repositories for free and many, many excellent additional features.
This has baffled me for quite a long time.
I notice that anyone with a link can download the repository. But the question is, where do they get the link from? I cannot seem to find a page on GitHub listing all the newly published repo.
Everytime I publish a new repo, there would be 3~6 mysterious clones follow shortly after, even when the number of visitor remains at most 2 persons.
While I welcome people to find out what my code can do, it somehow gives a pressure on me not to publish unfinalized code, and also not to amend the content of my repo after publishing it because they might already have cloned it before the changes are made.
Alright, it has 2 visitors (including me) to be exact:
You have no way to see who has checked out your repository using standard git commands such as git clone, but you can see who has forked your repository on GitHub in the Traffic section under Insights.
Now my first thought would be that those people cloned your repository outside of Github as you don't need to be a Github user to clone repository (so Github couldn't keep track of them and you wouldn't be able to see them).
Good luck, hope this helps.
I changed jobs and my beautiful green Github contributions graph is now almost completely empty. I worked on the same project every day for one year and now all my hard work looks like it's gone!
I realise this is because I was a collaborator on a private repo at my old company. When I started my new job, the old company removed me as a collaborator on their project.
I have looked through the docs on Github but it looks like that is how the graph works. Is there any way to get it back? How can I stop the same thing happening at my next job?
I have tried a lot but unable to find a fruitful solution.
From their website We recommend starring any repositories you contribute to. That way, your commits to those repositories will remain in your contributions graph even if you leave the organization that owns the repository or delete your fork of the repository.
I have tested this approach by creating another github account and starring the repository which doesn't work as they said.
I also have gone through this, but this doesn't help to solve the issue.
I don't think there is any way to show contribution if owner removes collaborator.
I have a Github repository, lets call it:
http://github.com/LegoStormtroopr/ExampleRepository
I want to hand ownership of this repository over to an Organisation to get:
http://github.com/MyCoolOrg/ExampleRepository
But, I want to keep working on the code on my own fork. If I forked this code, I'd once again have a repository with the address:
http://github.com/LegoStormtroopr/ExampleRepository
In effect, I'd move the upstream to the organisation, make forks in a local github fork, and then be able to issue pull requests to the organisation.
I'd like to do this with the least hassle and breakages, and the documentation on what happens after a repository is handed over is a little hazy.
Are there any serious issues that will happen as a result of shifting the repository like this? Will things break because a repository that was there disappeared for a short time?
So having just given this a shot, it appears there are no issues when doing this. However a few things to note:
The organisation cannot have a previous fork of the repository. This prevents it from being able to take ownership.
If you transfer the repository to the organisation, and then fork this into your own account, any working copies of this don't need to be updated, however changes you make will be pushed into your repository, not the organisations.
You may need to reconfigure third-party applications (like Travis-CI and Coveralls) to work with the new organisation, but this is straight forward:
From your account, go to settings and select Applications:
Find the application you need to reconnect (for example Travis-CI) and click View:
Next to each orgnaisation there will be a button titled Grant (not shown because I've already clicked it):
To get Coveralls working properly, in addition to the above, you also need to:
Set your visibility in the organisation to Public:
Refresh the list of repositories in Coveralls (ignore the button name, it syncs public and private repositories):
Lastly, to retain your coverage history, in Coveralls in your old repository select "Change source" and in the list select the corresponding repository in your new organisation.
And now your organisation is all set!
I want to fork a github project to fix a couple of issues and then send a pull request.
The problem I'm running into is that I've already forked the project to adapt it for another user base.
Is it possible to create a second fork? If so, how?
When I try to fork now it just takes me to the previously created fork.
There is no way to have two forks of the same GitHub project unless you use two different GitHub accounts.
So:
Create a separate GitHub account (and verify the email)
Fork the
project
Invite your main GitHub account as a "Collaborator" (from
the settings)
You may need to add the extra step of creating an organization with the new GitHub account and inviting your main github account as an owner of the organization (also make sure your new fork is in that new organization). This will let you do things like deploy automatically to a Heroku app that is connected to your main GitHub account.
Why can't we just have multiple forks???
I mean that I could just commit and push without making a pull request, but I want to do it the offical way and I want somebody else to review the changes before I push to a public project.
GitHub pull requests do not need to be submitted from a fork; they work within a single repository as well:
Pull requests are especially useful in the fork & pull model because they provide a way to notify project maintainers about changes in your fork. However, they're also useful in the shared repository model where they're used to initiate code review and general discussion about a set of changes before being merged into a mainline branch.
There's nothing stopping you from creating a pull request even if you don't technically have to. This is often considered a best practice, and GitHub's own Flow model is largely based on pull requests.
Creating a pull request within a single repository is very similar to creating one from a fork:
Create a feature branch and push your work to that branch on GitHub
In the GitHub web UI, switch to your feature branch
Click the "Compare" & review button
The trick is not to use the master branch to create pull requests. Then you won't need to create multiple forks since you can make as many branches as you need and make pull requests against each branch independently.
Given a clean forked repo, create a dedicated branch and use that branch for the pull request.
You can create branches from the web UI (although it is not obvious).
Click the branch selection dropdown, type the new branch name in the input field, and then you'll see a clickable link Create branch: <new-branch-name> as shown below. The tricky UI part is that it might not be very obvious you should click the "create branch: xyz..." — it is NOT displayed as a button or as a hyperlink, and there is NO indication that this is a clickable link. Moreover, there is NO hint whatsoever that a branch can be created until you type in the search box — anyone would probably assume that the search box is used exclusively for searching branches, and not for creating them.
In case you already made changes directly in your fork's master branch then consider moving those changes into a dedicated branch and hard resetting the master branch to the original remote so that you keep it clean for synching with the upstream repo.
See also:
https://docs.github.com/en/pull-requests/collaborating-with-pull-requests/proposing-changes-to-your-work-with-pull-requests/creating-and-deleting-branches-within-your-repository
The best way, recommended by github manual, is use command line git, mirror clone your repo and push it to your github.
https://docs.github.com/en/github/creating-cloning-and-archiving-repositories/duplicating-a-repository
If you strongly prefer GitHub web interface to the command line, a GUI friendly workaround is create a new organization and fork to that new organization.
Another GUI way I can think of is to declare a fork as a template repo using repo's setting so you can create as many forks as you need.