Basic version control with git chapter

[brian-rose]

Work in progress, but there's a basic outline of the chapter.

[github-actions[bot]]

This pull request is being automatically built with GitHub Actions and Netlify. To see the status of your deployment, click below.

🔍 Git commit SHA: a9db8046ad20a166c0c3a02ce98d6cd8e5789087 ✅ Deployment Preview URL: https://61e78cc1a6ca7c5067615e3e--pythia-foundations.netlify.app

[brian-rose]

@clyne @ktyle @r-ford @jukent This is as far as I'm going to get on this until next week. If you have a chance in the mean time, take a look at the outline and see if it makes sense.

[jukent]

Looks like some good progress! It was useful for me to read what you have as well (it can be hard to write chapter 3 without reading chapter 2, basically).

[clyne]

Good start. My one question is do we want to guide users on constructing new repos with 'git init', or have them create a repo on GitHub and clone it?

[brian-rose]

Good start. My one question is do we want to guide users on constructing new repos with 'git init', or have them create a repo on GitHub and clone it?

Good question! I suppose there's value in doing both, and there should be room in this chapter for examples of both.

My instinct says I should follow the outline as written here and cover the basic usage of git init along with other local command-line git stuff. But we can end the chapter with an example of the GitHub-centric workflow.

[brian-rose]

Good start. My one question is do we want to guide users on constructing new repos with 'git init', or have them create a repo on GitHub and clone it?

Good question! I suppose there's value in doing both, and there should be room in this chapter for examples of both.

My instinct says I should follow the outline as written here and cover the basic usage of git init along with other local command-line git stuff. But we can end the chapter with an example of the GitHub-centric workflow.

Update: after working more on the content of this chapter, I feel like it's getting long. I think the narrative works better if we skip repo creation entirely and treat this elsewhere. Or not at all! If our goal is getting users ready to contribute to Pythia, then creating a new repo from scratch is not actually necessary.

[brian-rose]

@clyne @jukent @ktyle @r-ford this is ready for review now. Cheers.

[r-ford]

Looks good! I didn't notice any typos or anything, so unless someone else has any comments for now, I think this is ready.

[brian-rose]

Something that I noticed when reviewing: you are using an "alias" for linking to other content within the book. E.g. Cloning a repository

I, and I believe @ktyle, are providing a full URL. Clearly, an alias is more maintainable, etc. I guess I just wanted to note this before changing my "making a PR" section.

Yes in general I think it's preferable to use a relative path rather than absolute for internal links. JupyterBook lets us link to pages with relative paths and with no file extension, and then just appends the .html at build time.

[clyne]

Merged!