Can this material on branching be recycled?

[gvwilson]

swcarpentry/DEPRECATED-bc#471

[iglpdc]

Maybe, I'll take a look. But I prefer to move it to Git intermediate lesson. (I'm writing a draft of the lesson with all the stuff that is hanging around here: I'll post it soon.)

[wking]

On Wed, Feb 03, 2016 at 08:33:07AM -0800, Ivan Gonzalez wrote:

I'm writing a draft of the lesson with all the stuff that is hanging
around here…

I'll ping @rgaiacs, since he just taught an intermediate-Git lesson
and has the basic lesson template all filled in 1.

[iglpdc]

Oh, great! I just took a look to @rgaiacs 's lesson and it's pretty much what I was thinking in (prolly minus bisect, plus more "undos" and git add -i). I think the goal should be to be able to do a PR to a repo and be able to handle most of the common hiccups in doing that.

[wking]

On Wed, Feb 03, 2016 at 09:04:36AM -0800, Ivan Gonzalez wrote:

…prolly minus bisect, plus more "undos" and git add -i…

Once learners have a reasonable foundation, intermediate/advanced
additions are mostly orthogonal. So you can skip the bisect section,
or an interactive-add section, etc., without missing something
critical for a subsequent topic. You'll just want time estimates in
the topics and a note in instructors.md suggesting folks pick and
choose what they want / have time for. The limit on the repo will
just be “does the lesson maintainer want to take responsibility for
maintaining $CONTENT?” and “are any novice Git users interested in
$CONTENT?”.

[rgaiacs]

@iglpdc I was planning to transfer that "intermediate" lesson that I wrote to Software Carpentry. I was only waiting to us have a procedure for it.

[gvwilson]

👍 to moving it to intermediate Git.

[chendaniely]

@iglpdc I'm running a few git workshops at school. I'm happy to use and provide feedback.

[rgaiacs]

@iglpdc I'm happy to work with you on the intermediate lesson during end of spring or summer.

[justbennet]

@rgaiacs @iglpdc Did the intermediate Git lesson material get committed? I don't see a repository for it, but perhaps I'm looking in the wrong place?

I was just looking at the warning message from Git 1.8 about the change in behavior of an unqualified git push origin and wondering whether to propose adding to the git configuration section of git-novice git config --global push.default ***, where perhaps what we suggest could do with a little discussion? Or would that be better discussed here?

[wking]

On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 03:07:00AM -0700, justbennet wrote: “I was just looking at the warning message from Git 1.8 about the change in behavior of an unqualified `git push origin` and wondering whether to propose adding to the git configuration section of git-novice `git config --global push.default ***`” I'd much rather teach folks to explicitly list the branches they're pushing and pulling. For lessons that don't teach “branches”, it will take a minute or so to motivate the presence of ‘master’ in ‘git push origin master’. But I don't think it will take as long or pull in as many unexplained terms as it would take to explain push.default.