I am working on automated service to work with Git hub repositories. And I am having problem on my side - I can't find a way to get all commit in particular branch by its hash\name.
My code is an automated tool to make code reviewes. So I've added a feature to ignore particular branch in my review process (ex. a testing branch or something like that). So in my service I am marking branch as ignored. Once I get commits from git hub api - there is no information there about which branch is current commit belongs to.
I started thinking that my overall github idea is wrong - since commit-branch link is pretty obvious thing so there should be something that made the API developers to ignore that in the GetCommits method
So my question is - Is there a way to find out which branch commit (using v3 api json result) belongs to in github api (v3 - GET /repos/:owner/:repo/commits/:sha).
Thanks
There is currently no way in GitHub's API to ask if a commit is in the history of a specific branch. The only thing you can do is fetch all the commits for a specific branch, and then iterate through the commits to see if a specific commit is in the list. To do that, make a request to /repos/:owner/:repo/commits?sha=branchname, where branchname is the name of the branch you want to fetch commits for e.g. https://api.github.com/repos/izuzak/pmrpc/commits?sha=master.
If you just want to check if your commit is for example on branch test123, do:
https://api.github.com/repos/golang/go/compare/test123...001a75a74c4a27901b0b536efe1be581612c52a9
and check the status.
If it's 'identical' or 'behind', then the commit is part of the branch. If it is different, it's not.
In Python with PyGitHub Library (https://pygithub.readthedocs.io/en/latest/index.html)
You can do
g = Github(accesskey) # PyGitHub object
repo = g.get_repo(repository) # Repository
commits = repo.get_commits(sha='stable-2.9') # Commits by a branch
Related
Can we create pull request from master branch to master branch in Azure devops because our team will work on directly in master branch and we need to code review and approval method also.
No this isn't how git works. You would have to branch off of master and then PR these branches back into master. Committing directly to master is not a recommended practice
Contributions to a source code repository that uses a distributed version control system are commonly made by means of a pull request, also known as a merge request.
The contributor requests that the project maintainer pulls the source code change, hence the name "pull request". The maintainer has to merge the pull request if the contribution should become part of the source base.
A pull request can be accepted or rejected by maintainers. Once the pull request is reviewed and approved, it is merged into the repository.
The above is how to pull request works.
We can push empty commits via git commit --allow-empty -m 1, But for your situation, even no empty commits(Because the source branch and target branch always the same), so of course the pull request will not be able to created.
Another thing will clearly tell you the reason:
If you use this API to create Pull Request from 'master' to 'master', you will find it is not accepted.
The detection of whether the 'sourcebranch' and 'targetbranch' are the same is high priority, even before the detection of the existence of the branch, so what you want to achieve is not possible from the basic of the design.
Background
I am using GitHub Enterprise.
I want to check unused branches in my repository, and ask owners of these unused branches to clean-up.
You can see "Your branches" (branches created by current user) on “Branches” page in GitHub. So I think GitHub might have information for who created a branch.
On the other hand, the result of GitHub REST API (https://developer.github.com/v3/git/refs/#get-a-reference) does not contain the creator of the specified branch.
Question
Is there’s any way to get the user who created a branch with GitHub API?
There is no real "ownership" associated to a branch with Git/GitHub.
As mentioned in the documentation, "Your branches" reference in a repository the branches you have push access to, not necessarily the ones you have "created".
The best you can do is, if you have access to a local clone, a simple git fetch, followed by:
git for-each-ref --format="%(committerdate) %09 %(refname:short) %09 %(authorname)" --sort=-committerdate refs/remotes/origin
That will list the remote branches from the most recent updated one to the oldest, with the author of the last commit on each branch.
But if you have to use GitHub API, then you would need to:
list the remote branches,
then for each one get the commit mentioned with the branch
You can then contact the committer of that most recent commit.
Can anyone explain why a commit in GitHub would display the following information : 'Contributor-A' committed with 'Contributor-B' on 15 Feb.
Does it mean that 'Contributor-A' is the author (who does not have the push access to the master) and 'Contributor-B' is the committer/maintainer?
Then why isn't there a PR created for merging this commit? Or does it mean that there was a closed PR about this commit, but the maintainer did not merge it via web interface but performed rebase or cherry-picking to include it?
Many thanks!
...maintainer did not merge it via web interface but performed rebase or cherry-picking to include it?
I was able to get this by cherry-picking a commit from another branch and directly pushing to the current branch - an example on GitHub.
A Pull Request is not required to push code between branches. A Pull Request is a method that allows developers to collaborate on changes prior to merging between branches.
For sure, it happens when the pull request was merged by "Rebase and Merge" strategy via the web interface, but I'm not sure if this is the unique case.
Contributor-A committed with Contributor-B on 15 Feb.
Contributor-A submitted the pull request and Contributor-B effectively merged it.
It might happen in other scenarios as described here: how to apply a git patch as if the author committed to my repo?
We use GitHub flow as branching strategy which means that anything in master is the result of a merged pull request. It's trivial to get the last commit by doing the following.
GET https://api.github.com/repos/:org/:repo/git/refs/heads/master
However it seems non-trivial to work out the pull request that caused this commit.
Is it possible to find out the pull request that created this commit via the API?
The PR should be one of the parents—the second one—of the commit in master, since that commit is the result of a merge of the PR.
You can find that parent with the GitHub commit API
GET /repos/:owner/:repo/git/commits/:sha
GitHub doesn't offer a way to get the branch from a commit, but you could list all the PR and cross-reference the SHA1 found above with said PRs.
I've done a few pull requests on GH already, but I committed to the master branch. Now I read on various places that it's a good idea to create a branch.
Are there any guidelines for branch naming? I usually work with Mercurial and give my branches the same name as their relevant bug ticket ID, but that doesn't work for this.
I've looked at a few repositories: some commit to master, some commit to fix-somebug, some commit to patch-1. I understand that this doesn't create conflicts, because pull requests are merged to master (or a different, long living branch) and the branch is then deleted, is that correct?
The idea behind a branch for a pull request is to allow for said branch to be automatically deleted once the pull request is accepted.
And since April 2013, that branch will be deleted for you:
You are then suppose to update/rebase your master from the master of the upstream repo in order to get what you developed in isolation a branch from the official repo that you have forked (since that repo has accepted your pull request)
The name of the branch should represent the development effort you are engaged in.
It is always a good practise to make commit on the git branches rather than master. You can use any name for your git branch(it doesn't allow spaces in branch names, also some special characters).