-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 852
Preferred cloning URL #130
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Comments
The second form is the one GitHub offers for "Clone with HTTPS", while the last is the one it offers for "Clone with SSH", so I think it makes sense to stick with recommending those two and suggest:
The default recommended flow would then be:
Folks following the "lazy fork" model just reverse the roles of the two URLs:
|
Note that technically we don't have "read-write" clones anymore since we can't push directly to any branches on python/cpython. In any case, +1 for making the upstream (python/cpython)-origin (yourfork/cpython) model the default recommendation. |
By read-write clones, I was referring to clones-of-your-fork, vs read-only clones of the primary repo. |
Advantages of the https form:
The https form prompts for a password each time, but you can set up a git credential manager to address that (Windows git comes with git credential manager as part of the install). |
I like how GitLab recommends getting a local copy of a pull request (which they call merge requests). They recommend using E.g. from a Mailman MR:
I usually substitute something shorter for the |
|
Closed by #140 |
So far I met a few different ways to get a clone:
AFAICT there is no difference between the first two but when I use those it asks me for user/password whenever I try to push something, whereas if I use the third way it doesn't.
Is there a preferred form that we should use in the devguide? Are there other differences that should be noted? Do contributors and core devs use the same URL?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: