I've deployed an app on Netlify through continuous deployment by linking a single Github repo. I had previously been making commits to the project locally, and my contributions were being tracked for this repo. However, now that I've linked the repo to Netlify, it seems no commits or contributions I make are picked up by Github. The commits can still be seen in the Github repo and commits are updated, but the contributions no longer are tracked despite them working previously.
For some context I've checked the Github help page on contributions:
https://help.github.com/en/github/setting-up-and-managing-your-github-profile/why-are-my-contributions-not-showing-up-on-my-profile
And cannot see what rule I've violated; I'm working on this on my own, it's a standalone repo, etc etc. considering they were being tracked before for the same repo, I'm confused as to what has changed now that Netlify has been integrated.
Any help/guidance appreciated
So it had nothing to do with Netlify, but my work Mac did not have me globally installed as the commit author with my email. After that, all previous authors were wrong as being my local computer email.
To get around this I followed this tutorial to replace all previous commits with the correct author: How do I change the author and committer name/email for multiple commits?
Related
As the pictures show below, the git clones of my repo is 26, and the visitor of my repo is 4. According to the literal meaning, the cloners means who look my repo page and decide to clone my repo to local or somewhere, and also, in the meantime, they should become the visitors of my repo. However, the traffic data of my repo shows that the results of visitors and cloners are much different from each other.
My insight of visitor and coloner is right? What is the GitHub official definition of the cloners and visitors? Or, the significant difference that shows on my picture just caused by the bug of GitHub.
The command git clone http://url will clone the repo without visiting GitHub. Maybe your repo's name is an easy misspelling of another repo, or someone attempted to download all repos by cloning from a list of URLs, looking for loose passwords or doing statistical research.
It could be cloned by you from another IP (other home/TOR/VPN) or you told someone about the repo and someone cloned it without visiting the page.
Do you have a CI/CD server or a DevOps pipeline?
These will clone your repo automatically when triggered by a commit or
a pull request.
I've been able to publish GitHub sites under my domain on GitHub Pages from the master branch without issue, however in the docs it says to use a gh-pages branch or master/docs for publishing projects.
I also have a repository for my homepage index.html file/assets, where I link to each of the published GitHub repositories (which are published to my domain name.com/repo-name).
Why have I been able to publish from the master branch? Is there any reason to publish from the gh-pages branch or master/docs instead for publishing project repositories?
GitHub Pages can publish from any of those sources: gh-pages branch, master/docs, or just from the repo itself. It's more of a preference which route you use.
For example, Jekyll is publishing using the master/docs option. The rest of the repo outside of the docs folder is for the actual Jekyll code. One possible reason is that PR's with new features must also include documentation of that new feature. Otherwise, it won't get merged.
The gh-pages option means that code and documentation can be paced or managed differently. They live in the same repo, but the branches can grow at differing speeds.
In terms of technical differences, there's no technical costs/benefits to each option as far as I know. It's just how you want to organize your code and documentation.
Hope that helps!
GitHub requires user and organization sites to build from master, while project sites can build from gh-pages. If I understand correctly, you are publishing to your user site, i.e. yourusername.github.io.
Similar questions have been asked but I haven't been able to find my answer:
My site is fine locally and all the correct files seem to be on my GitHub, but my published site (https://username.github.io/project) is still only showing my first intitial push.
Can someone direct me to troubleshoot?
From "Configuring a publishing source for GitHub Pages"
make sure you have enabled GitHub Pages to publish your site from master or gh-pages
or that you are one a master branch, subfolder docs.
Then you might need to wait a minute or two before seeing those pages rendered.
This is the story.
I have two computers, one is in my home, another is in my office. Both computers have installed Eclipse and connect to the same project of my github account wtih Egit. I find that when I commit on my home computer, my commit will be recorded and display on my contribution graph. However, when I commit on my office computer, commits will not be recorded.
To solve this problem, I delete projects both on my home computer and office computer, and create new project by cloning corresponding project on github.com with identical steps. Furthermore, I use the same eclipse version, they are the newest Mars. However, the problem still remains, commits on home computer will be recorded, and the other will not.
I searched the Internet and can not find the answer. Is there anybody here can help me out? Thanks in advance!
Problem solved. If someone else meet the similar problem, the following link will be quite useful. https://help.github.com/articles/why-are-my-commits-linked-to-the-wrong-user
Just add your second machines SSH key (assuming you use them) to your account and you should be set. then clone your existing project from the repo, and start working normally. any changes, just commit/push, and from the other machine you can always pull any updates, vice versa.
Commits will appear on your contributions graph if they meet all of the following conditions:
The commits were made within the past year.
The email address used for the commits is associated with your GitHub account.
The commits were made in a standalone repository, not a fork.
The commits were made:
In the repository's default branch (usually master)
In the gh-pages branch (for repositories with Project Pages sites)
In addition, at least one of the following must be true:
You are a collaborator on the repository or are a member of the organization - that owns the repository.
You have forked the repository.
You have opened a pull request or issue in the repository.
You have starred the repository.
Contributions to private repositories will only appear to users who can access those repositories. Those contributions are not rendered for users who cannot access those repositories.
I recently played around with the Jekyll/Poole/Lanyon theme for a new blog. At first, I linked my domain jonathancharleslee.com to my github pages site at jonathancharleslee.github.io
When I update files locally, I can update site features and posts - however, when I push to github it won't update on jonathancharleslee.github.io
Any help is much appreciated.
You're on a user/organisation repository (username.github.io). This type of repository needs you to push in master branch, not in gh-pages.
See Github Pages doc
You should be working and making all your changes on the development branch, then pushing ONLY your built files to the master branch, which is what Github Pages will publish.
There's step-by-step instructions on how to do this in this posting:
https://stackoverflow.com/a/44296933/7669275