Talk:Download from Git

About this board

Sophivorus (talkcontribs)

According to Download from Git#Keeping up to date, to do a minor update from, say, MediaWiki 1.39.1 to 1.39.3, I should do the following:

git pull
composer update --no-dev
php maintenance/update.php

This I do, and all goes well. However, after a successful update, I'd expect that running git status should yield an empty report (no unstaged changes, no untracked files), but it doesn't. Instead, I see all bundled extensions listed as unstaged changes, and all non-bundled extensions listed as untracked.

The first list I usually resolve by running:

git submodule update --init --recursive

Should this be added to Download from Git#Keeping up to date?

And what about the non-bundled extensions that appear listed as untracked? Is this expected? Shouldn't the extensions directory be included in .gitignore or something? What's the proper way to do a minor update?

Bawolff (talkcontribs)

It depends a little bit on how you're using git. If you are following tags, you would need to change to the 1.39.3 tag first. If you are following a release branch, then git pull would work.

I would recommend git pull --recurse-submodules if using a release branch so it automatically updates submodules.

Extra extensions you added being untracked is to be expected. Perhaps extensions other then bundled ones should be added to .gitignore, but that is not currently done at this time.

Reply to "Proper way to update" (talkcontribs)

Ain't 1.31.15 the legacy and 1.35.3 the lts - exactly the opposite of what's said in the section?

Legoktm (talkcontribs)

Fixed. 1.35.3 is both the "LTS" and the "legacy" release. 1.31.15 is the "legacy LTS".

Jdforrester (WMF) (talkcontribs)

This isn't fixed, it's just differently broken. It now renders as "Currently, these are 1.36.1 (stable), 1.35.3 (LTS) and 1.35.3 (legacy)."

Jdforrester (WMF) (talkcontribs)

We can "fix" it temporarily by making it:

Currently, these are <tvar name=1>{{MW stable release number}}</tvar> (stable), <tvar name=2>{{MW lts release number}}</tvar> ([[LTS]]) and <tvar name=3>{{MW legacy lts release number}}</tvar> (legacy LTS).

… and then when 1.31 goes EOL changing it to:

Currently, these are <tvar name=1>{{MW stable release number}}</tvar> (stable) and <tvar name=2>{{MW lts release number}}</tvar> ([[LTS]]).

Sound reasonable? (talkcontribs)

It does to me. The way it is now is a bit confusing. I guess it's less inaccurate than previously but it makes one (me) wonder why the same versions are mentioned twice.

Jdforrester (WMF) (talkcontribs)

link to list of skins does not work

Qdinar (talkcontribs)
Shirayuki (talkcontribs)

Yes Done

Reply to "link to list of skins does not work"

using depth when cloning a tag

Berot3 (talkcontribs)

I couldn't find anything related here.

I wanted to use git to download the 1.35.1 tag but with --depth=1. I think it is workth mentioning on Download from Git#Download a stable branch that (from what I found on google) this is the command:

git clone --branch 1.35.1 --depth=1 mediawiki

so instead of cloning a actual branch, we can use the tag.

How did I get to this you may ask? Well when first doing:

git clone --branch REL1_35 mediawiki --depth=1

and than

git checkout 1.35.1

(as the page suggests) you wont get anywhere, because no tags where downloaded.

Am I missing something? Let me know please.

Berot3 (talkcontribs)

or is it so that --branch REL1_35 already is on tag 1.35.1? But than why should I checkout 1.35.1?

MarkAHershberger (talkcontribs)

Try the following:

git clone -b 1.35.1 --single-branch mediawiki
MarkAHershberger (talkcontribs)

Never mind, it looks like using git to specify a single tag as the branch is the quickest and most light-weight checkout.

Checking out the entire repo and then fetching just that tag takes me about half a minute longer and 40mb more space than just checking out a single branch:

 time (
   git clone &&
   cd core &&
   git checkout 1.35.1
 ) && du -sh core
 user    5m11.114s
 448M    core


 time git clone -b 1.35.1 --single-branch \ &&
 du -sh core
 user    4m40.874s
 407M    core

But your method is fast and cheap.

 time git clone -b 1.35.1 --depth 1 \ &&
 du -sh core
 user    0m2.076s
 174M    core
Berot3 (talkcontribs)

Thanks, but I just googled ;)

Did you maybe see my second question? I’m a bit confused, if just clone the branch, am I already on 1.35.1? If so than I could also clone the branch with depth=1.

MarkAHershberger (talkcontribs)

A branch is not the same as a tag. Commits can be on a branch after the revision tagged 1.35.1. If you want 1.35.1, it is best to directly check it out.

Berot3 (talkcontribs)

so as I thought, on both (-b 1.35.1 and -b REL1_35) I am greeted with the initial setup for 1.35.1.

Sure, as you said, if you really want the exact version from the release-date, use the tag. But I guess when I stay on the branch REL1_35 and there comes version 1.35.2 around, I will probably only have to run git pull --recurse-submodules to get the latest code.

Berot3 (talkcontribs)

but that is my problem with the page: it suggest using --depth=1 (with -b REL1_35), but when doing so, I can not later git tag -l | sort -V and git checkout 1.35.1.

The text needs to be written like that: If you want clone a tag (1.35.1) AND use --depth=1 you have to clone it directly with -b 1.35.1.

Or am I totally in the wrong here?

MarkAHershberger (talkcontribs)

Last night I had to pull get branches for a shallow clone, so I ended up looking for the answer.

The answer is that you have to tell git where to get branches from:

 git remote set-branches origin '*'
 git fetch

After that, you'll be able to check out branches from a repo that you originally created with a shallow clone.

Berot3 (talkcontribs)

well at first I think we are talking about two different problems:

  1. Problem: is it better to use branches (REL1_35) or tags (1.35.1). I think we should at first clarify on the article that a: there are two ways to clone the stable branch/tag and b: it is recommended to always clone the current stable tag instead of the branch. Would you agree? So when 1.36 comes along, it would be better to clone --branch 1.36 instead of REL1_36 (i still find it confusing that --branch is used for branches and tags qually. that means you can't have a tag with the same name as a branch, right?)
  2. Problem: use of depth It is not clear from the description of the page that you can't use git tag -l | sort -V after you cloned with depth=1! So I would explain it in a way that you either clone without depth and than be able to switch tags or use depth=1. of course (thanks for that) here is your command coming in handy (when cloned with depth=1) git remote set-branches origin '*' git fetch

Did I miss something? :)

MarkAHershberger (talkcontribs)
i still find it confusing that --branch is used for branches and tags qually. that means you can't have a tag with the same name as a branch, right?
I hadn't thought about it, but I think you're right.
Did I miss something?
I think you've got it.
Reply to "using depth when cloning a tag"

Keeping up to date (with extensions)

Berot3 (talkcontribs)

So I tried to make update. git pull in the mediawiki-folder worked fine. but than the page says:

The new version of core may require newer versions of extensions and skins, so you must go into each extension and skin directory and update it with a command like git pull --recurse-submodules.

so I went to extensions/ and into any folder and run git pull. I always got this error:

You are not currently on a branch.
Please specify which branch you want to merge with.
See git-pull(1) for details.
git pull <remote> <branch>

Did I miss something?

Shirayuki (talkcontribs)
Berot3 (talkcontribs)

Thanks. But I wonder if this is necessary? I already pulled the core-repo. Shouldn't there be a command like git submodule update --init to also update all the sub-modules? I don't think it makes sense to go into every extension-subfolder/module and switch branch and pull manually.

Maybe git submodule update --recursive --remote ?

MarkAHershberger (talkcontribs)

When you checkout a submodule (for example, Vector via git submodule update --init skins/Vector), the repository for the submodule is on a specific commit, not a branch. That is the cause of the You are not currently on a branch message.

Release branches for MediaWiki have submodules for all the extensions but the measter branch does not. Which means that, yes, you can use git submodule update --init --recursive on release branches for those extensions included in the release branch, but not on master, as a general rule. (That last submodule command will not change anything if your parent repository is on the same revision as it was when you initially checked out the submodules.)

The exception to this rule for master is if you used git to create submodules for the extensions you install. If you add the Foo extension via git submodule add -f extensions/Foo, then you can update it later using a git submodule command. If you just want to update the already checked-out branches for any submodules, then the command you're looking for is git submodule foreach git pull.

Berot3 (talkcontribs)

ok, I think I should have clarified that I not intend to be on master. sorry.

I want to clone stable:

  1. clone -b 1.35.1 --depth=1
  2. git submodule update --init

That means I have also the bundled extensions with stable version.

My question now is: Should I update the bundled extensions from time to time when they release new version (or don't they?)?

Or should I wait for the next stable release of mediawiki where I will clone the new bundled extensions?

MarkAHershberger (talkcontribs)
ok, I think I should have clarified that I not intend to be on master. sorry.
No, I understood that. What I said stands.
Should I update the bundled extensions from time to time when they release new version (or don't they?)?
If any of the bundled extensions has a back-ported fix, the MediaWiki version will change. Because of the development that most of core MW and the bundled extensions have used, they tend not to back-port anything but security fixes. Announcements for these updates are made on the announcements mailing list.

So, unless you want to spend the time to follow master or the WMF branches, you don't have to worry about upgrading your extensions outside of the MW update cycle.

Reply to "Keeping up to date (with extensions)"
Berot3 (talkcontribs)

I have a question regarding /vendor (#Fetch_external_libraries)

I am downloading with

  • git clone --depth=1 --branch 1.35.1 mediawiki
  • git submodule update --init --recursive

When I look under /vendor, I can see that it is not empty. Is it possible that in my case it is not necessary to use composer or download from git once more?

From what I understand I only need composer for additional extensions?

MarkAHershberger (talkcontribs)

Right, MW's git repo has a vendor submodule. If you just use that git checkout, you don't need to run composer update (unless you want to update one of the dependencies).

Reply to "downloading vendor"

Keeping an addendum indicating the change from old standards

Paradox of Thrift (talkcontribs)

I suggest there be an addendum created on this page (and others) indicating when a standard has changed -- links, for example. Doing so would allow users to find this page through a search engine when querying the older style links that are used in a plethora of non-updated examples. This would save others from the repeat of my unproductive experience:

I was following this page: in learning how to add some extensions but got tripped up on the old standard of linking to the code repository:

whereas it is now:

Most older examples accessing the repository incorporate the old standard link which no longer work and do not lead here.

Jdforrester (WMF) (talkcontribs)

We can't really fix other people's outdated sites, sadly. There was quite a lot of noise made at the time of the gerrit upgrade two(?) years ago that /r/p/ links won't work any more. The more banners and warnings you put on these pages, the more readers will ignore them entirely, or miss the important bits.

Reply to "Keeping an addendum indicating the change from old standards"

Problem with 'git submodule update'

Spas.Z.Spasov (talkcontribs)

I'm just trying to downloading all extensions, following this sequence:

git clone
cd extensions
git submodule update --init --recursive

The problem is that some extensions asks for authentication. I've made account in but it is 'Unauthorized' and result is:

$ git submodule update --init --recursive
Cloning into 'Notifications'...
Username for '': Spas.Z.Spasov
Password for '':
remote: Unauthorized
fatal: Authentication failed for ''
fatal: clone of '' into submodule path 'Notifications' failed

(I found that extension '2ColConflict' also make this trouble...)

Could someone help me get through this?

Jaideraf (talkcontribs)

Same problem to me. Notifications asks username and password.

Jaideraf (talkcontribs)

@Spas.Z.Spasov I did

cd extensions/
git submodule foreach 'git checkout -b REL1_28 origin/REL1_28 || :'
git submodule update --init --recursive

And now it works.

Spas.Z.Spasov (talkcontribs)

Thank you! I will try it these days. And will report also.

Why "install-dir" are translatable?

Liuxinyu970226 (talkcontribs)

Are those "translations" of commands really work in Git softwares?

Reply to "Why "install-dir" are translatable?"

Translation: source needs update

Omotecho (talkcontribs)
Reply to "Translation: source needs update"