Re: [Gimp-developer] [Gimp-docs] [Gimp-web] Proposed gimp tutorial

Roman & Pat,

I spent quite a bit of time fiddling round with git-bz and after
downloading it, configuring it, and trying to use it to send in the
differences from  checking my tutorial into git (local check out / check in
*seems* OK), I have come to the conclusion that this is probably not what
you guys are using because it sure seems to be - broken.  After trying to
send in a patch with git-bz it told me that I did not seem to be logged
into in firefox - I am.  It does not seem to be able to
read the cookies (Firefox V22 on Fedora).

Is there a set of instructions written down anywhere that indicates what
format and method someone should use to send in changes, updates and new
content like a tutorial?  I did format the tutorial into web format and do
a checkout / check in into the repository, but not being able to get any
farther with it is beginning to take a lot of time.

The files I am trying to check in are in a share (should be easy to
download) at:

I would appreciate any help you could give me.  I will be on the road for
about a week, so I may be slow getting back to you.



On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 7:22 AM, Stephen Kiel <snick kiel gmail com> wrote:

Roman and Pat,

I have made some progress toward getting my tutorial ready for release,
but I am at a point now where I have hit a wall, and I would like to ask
for some advice on how to proceed.

I did do a final edit of the tutorial, format it into xhtml, and add a
couple of pictures. I downloaded a copy of Bluefish and used it to format
the material into an xhtml file adding the boilerplate provided in the
tutorial template by hand. It seemed to render well in the Firefox browser.

I did find a procedure for adding content through git web at and followed it as best as I could.
I was able to clone the gimp-web, check out a branch, make local changes
and commit them, but then my progress stopped. My questions are:

 1) when I performed a 'git branch -r' several branches were listed. I
guessed and picked HEAD as it appeared to link to origin/master. When I did
a 'git status' and 'git commit -a' I got a warning message that “refname
'HEAD' is ambiguous”. Did I pick the wrong branch? Is there another
problem, or is this warning normal?

 2) The guidelines I was looking at seemed to be saying I could either
use 'git-bz' or 'git push' to get my changes back to the main repository.
Neither worked, so I was wondering which technique I should focus on. Would
rather not debug them both at this time (could use quite a bit of time,
since I don't know what either is trying to do).

 The error message that I go with git-bz was:

bash: git-bz: command not found...

 The error message from git push –dry-run was:

fatal: Could not read from remote repository.

 Please make sure you have the correct access rights

and the repository exists.

 A git pull –rebase right before trying the push seemed to find the
repository and verify that my current branch is up to date.

 I would appreciate any pointers you could give me. I am attaching a copy
of the transcript from my shell session. I am also attaching a copy of the
files I was trying to add & modify in case it is relevant or you would like
to take a look at them.

 In the mean time, I will start looking at git-bz in case that is the
write way to go. It looks like there may be some setup issues, even though
the error message make it look like it is an installation issue. The
options for the bz command were not clear to me. The wiki page indicated
the syntax should be:

git-bz file product/component HEAD

I am guessing the product should be 'gimp-web', but when I look at I see the
component listed as both gimp-web and Do you know which it
should be, or whether it matters? When it asks for 'file' I am assuming it
is looking for the results of the local 'commit'. In my case the feedback

[HEAD a97ce5a] Added tutorial Automate Creation fo XCF from JPG"

Are they looking for a97ce5a as the file?


 Stephen Kiel

On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 10:49 PM, Roman Joost <romanofski gimp org> wrote:

Dear Stephen,

On Tue, Jul 02, 2013 at 12:37:33PM -0700, Stephen Kiel wrote:

I did browse through some of the tutorials & looked at they way they
marked up.  I don't think porting my tutorials into a markup language
be any problem.  The part that I don't really understand yet is whether
there are tags that will or won't work right.  In other words, if the
is well formed and presents in a web browser is there any downstream
processing that looks at or uses particular tags? e.g. some of the xhtml
that I looked at used the older <b> tags for bold instead of <strong>.
Both work, one is more contemporary, but what I am wondering is whether
there is a reason to use the older tag format.
Not sure. I think these are remnants of old edits which have simply been
updated for a new version of the website.

Once I do get ready to check out the module and add my tutorial, is
any kind of an approval process, or do I just stage the changes and
Usually you can send in your patches and they're been reviewed by people
who have access to the module. The more you contribute, the more likely
maintainers see to getting you commit (read: push) rights.

Thanks for the feedback & help.
Happy to help!

Kind Regards,
Roman Joost
email: romanofski gimp org

Stephen Kiel
26602 Strafford
Mission Viejo, CA 92692
*Mobile/SMS (949) 702-1993*
Home (949) 367-2915
snick kiel gmail com

Stephen Kiel
26602 Strafford
Mission Viejo, CA 92692
*Mobile/SMS (949) 702-1993*
Home (949) 367-2915
snick kiel gmail com

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]