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

issue #370 - Improved wording for 'Reverting a commit' #434

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: gh-pages
from

Conversation

Projects
None yet
4 participants
@tylerkelly13
Contributor

tylerkelly13 commented Aug 17, 2017

Per #370, this commit attempts to improve the wording of the 'Reverting a commit' challenge.

  • Changed 'group repository' to 'project repository' to be more consistent with the preceding challenge
  • Improved explanation of the difference between git checkout and git revert
  • replaced 'wrong' with 'error'
  • general attempt to improve challenge
issue #370 - Improved wording for 'Reverting a commit'
Per #370, this commit attempts to improve the wording of the 'Reverting a commit' challenge. 
- Changed 'group repository' to 'project repository' to be more consistent with the preceding challenge
- Improved explanation of the difference between git checkout <commit> and git revert <commit>
- replaced 'wrong' with 'error'
- general attempt to improve challenge
@alex-konovalov

This comment has been minimized.

alex-konovalov commented Aug 17, 2017

Thank you @tylerkelly13 - I like multiple improvements of the wording used! I reread the text and still think that it should be moved later, perhaps even to "Collaborating". Observe that the 1st line of the challenge starts with "Jennifer is collaborating on he" Python script with her colleagues...".

@tylerkelly13

This comment has been minimized.

Contributor

tylerkelly13 commented Aug 21, 2017

I agree it does seem a bit out of place, so if someone can figure out a better place for it we can move it. Maybe one of the maintainers might comment? Collaborating does make sense regarding the context, but reverting a commit should also be early on, given that it is 'undoing' an error and shows learners that such a mistake would not be permanent, making git less daunting (I suspect).

@alex-konovalov

This comment has been minimized.

alex-konovalov commented Aug 21, 2017

@tylerkelly13 Indeed... maybe this should evolve into two portions: one in a local repository (that does not have remotes at all), covering reverting last commit and then reverting some commit from the past, and then later the same in the context of collaborative work. Hope maintainers may say a word.

@nhejazi nhejazi self-requested a review Feb 20, 2018

@nhejazi

Thanks for the contribution @tylerkelly13! These changes looks good to me. Before merging, I'd like to suggest that we open an issue for further discussing the suggestion to add a new section and move this material around, as per the conversation with @alex-konovalov. Within the context of this PR, I don't think this is necessary for the purposes of merging, but the broader discussion is still worth having.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment