PR#354: README.md update - copr/copr

copr / copr

#354 README.md update

Merged 5 years ago by clime. Opened 5 years ago by clime.

readme_update into master

README.md update: Copr instances do not necessarily need to be public

clime • 5 years ago

bae5bfd

README.md update

clime • 5 years ago

2f44c4e

README.md

file modified

+1 -1

		`@@ -6,7 +6,7 @@`
		`[Already reported bugs](https://bugzilla.redhat.com/buglist.cgi?bug_status=NEW&bug_status=ASSIGNED&bug_status=POST&bug_status=MODIFIED&bug_status=ON_DEV&bug_status=ON_QA&bug_status=VERIFIED&bug_status=RELEASE_PENDING&classification=Community&list_id=4678560&product=Copr&query_format=advanced) \|`
		`[Fedora Copr](https://copr.fedoraproject.org)`

		`- Copr is a Community projects build service that builds your open-source project and creates your own RPM repository. See it in action [here](https://copr.fedoraproject.org).`
		`+ Copr ("Community projects") is a web service that builds your open-source projects and creates your own RPM repositories. See it in action [here](https://copr.fedoraproject.org).`

		`![See Copr workflow](/copr/copr/raw/master/f/doc/img/copr-workflow.png)`

clime commented 5 years ago

Rewording.

1 new commit added

README.md update: Copr instances do not necessarily need to be public

5 years ago

frostyx commented 5 years ago

Ideally I would squash the commits together.
+1 though, the explanation is better now.

praiskup commented 5 years ago

+1 (should be squashed)

praiskup commented 5 years ago

Maybe s/a web service/a service/ (or cloud service)?

clime commented 5 years ago

I am -1 against squashing the commits. It just takes away the history.

I think "a web service" is the most precise term here. Just "a service" sounds like something is missing there, maybe it's just me.

praiskup commented 5 years ago

Seeing string "README.md update" brings really no help to history :-). Forget about what
we wrote here in pagure chat, what was said face to face -- the only history that will survive
forever in git or git-log.

Generally, each commit should be logically solid block of changes. Doing such trivial change
in multiple commits just makes the git history useless.

Ad. "web", if you feel it's proper word.. I don't mind tha tmuch, it sounds like equivalent to "public" to me.

clime commented 5 years ago

Seeing string "README.md update" brings really no help to history :-). Forget about what
we wrote here in pagure chat, what was said face to face -- the only history that will survive
forever in git or git-log.
Generally, each commit should be logically solid block of changes. Doing such trivial change
in multiple commits just makes the git history useless.

I don't think it makes it useless, it then exactly matches the PR discussion and the natural development of the PR is maintained. There are cases when squashing is probably good (e.g. many small changes because one doesn't know what he is doing exactly) but usually I don't it is necessary.
It mainly depends on the individual commit messages - if they have value in being separate or not. In this case it have a little bit of value due to the realization that some people might want run COPR non-publically on their internal network just for their personal purposes.

Ad. "web", if you feel it's proper word.. I don't mind tha tmuch, it sounds like equivalent to "public" to me.

"web" rather means that web technologies (technologies for developing web services) are used. Anyway, the web frontned is what user sees at first when he/she looks at a Copr instance.

clime commented 5 years ago

Ok, so let's merge this to keep things moving.

Pull-Request has been merged by clime

5 years ago