I will experiment to familiarize myself with such cases. Perhaps I just removed it from GHD and then re-added it. Perhaps I deleted the repo and recloned outside GHD. I definitely 100% selected that when I originally cloned! However it seems to be set to wrong value now. Either don't be silent or don't obstruct the - My apologies. But silently obstructing the choice during the primary UI flow for doing it is a bad experience for the user. TL DR: default values are a convenience you can hide in prefs. But I accept that other universities may have different processes or be more open to work-arounds (I have a particular aversion to diverging from industry), so I don't know how big this part of the market is. I am proposing education as a not-so-limited edge-case. The reason why we've chosen not to provide a toggle in this particular case is that we think it's such a limited edge case So the previous behavior often would mean people working from forks in Desktop were starting new branches way out of date from the latest commits, and this was intended to help people ensure they're up to date when starting on a new branch. This was an intentional change in #7762 based on the vast majority of forks being used to contribute to the upstream branch. There is some existing discussion here: #9384. I just want to be able to change it, without leaving GHD. I would have preferred a warning dialog "your branch is out of date", and perhaps a checkbox "always pull before branching". IMO defaulting to the upstream is incredibly unintuitive, especially when my forked develop & origin/develop have commits that aren't in upstream/develop. I accept that there are almost certainly work-arounds but this does not address problem (2) - in industry the expectation is that I'm able to branch I don't want to break that in my classroom environment. Note: When cloning, my students explicitly select an option to make PRs against their forks, not the upstream. This process teaches them a normal development workflow, facilitates feedback, and allows them to compare their code to mine. Each week they create a branch and PR their work (to their fork, not upstream). I want to use a fork so that they can easily diff against my solution code. My students fork their repos from my template. It seems to me that education should be a major market for GitHub Desktop for this reason. I picked GitHub Desktop because it's no fuss and it "just works". I don't want to teach anything artificial that our students have to unlearn later. I want to use industry tools & standard development processes as much as possible because I think the best learning environment is a real environment. I'm trying to promote using GitHub in the classroom. I am a lecturer and our university's GitHub Campus Advisor. With this feature, GHD is my first choice for teaching. IMO this is a deal-breaker preventing adoption of GHD. At that point there is no point using GitHub Desktop. Benefits: Without this feature, my students are forced to leave GitHub Desktop to use the CLI or another Git Client."change" link next to the current source). Solution: Let the user change the source for new branches (i.e.=> problem: I feel uncomfortable promoting GHD when it cannot do something fundamental that every other client in the industry can So that more teachers are able to integrate source control, code review, CICD, etc into their classes I want to promote a simple & intuitive Git Client for teaching => problem: re-branch is not possible in GHD So that students can learn a standard development process, I can review their code frequently, they can begin from a starter template, they avoid fiddly repo creation or fork decoupling actions, they are able to diff against my solution code. I want students to make weekly branches and merges within a student fork Describe the feature or problem you’d like to solve
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |