Recipes draft

[martinosorb]

I created this PR to check if it was possible to merge the Recipes version without too much pain, and so we can discuss whether this is a good choice.
Before merging we have a number of TODOs:

• Ask @dpshelio if there are any objections to using their material and how we can acknowledge them
• Ask @swcarpentry/git-novice-es-maintainers how much would this affect the Spanish language fork and whether they are ok with updating their translation accordingly
• As @swcarpentry/git-novice-maintainers, consider if this is what we want to do, as opposed to other choices
• Under suggestion from @kekoziar, avoid cocktails and use something alcohol-free instead
• Gather opinions from the CAC @swcarpentry/governance-committee

[github-actions]

Thank you!

Thank you for your pull request 😃

🤖 This automated message can help you check the rendered files in your submission for clarity. If you have any questions, please feel free to open an issue in {sandpaper}.

If you have files that automatically render output (e.g. R Markdown), then you should check for the following:

• 🎯 correct output
• 🖼️ correct figures
• ❓ new warnings
• ‼️ new errors

Rendered Changes

🔍 Inspect the changes: https://github.com/swcarpentry/git-novice/compare/md-outputs..md-outputs-PR-1003

The following changes were observed in the rendered markdown documents:

 02-setup.md                          |  12 +-
 03-create.md                         |  75 +++++------
 04-changes.md                        | 246 +++++++++++++++++++---------------
 05-history.md                        | 224 ++++++++++++++++---------------
 06-ignore.md                         | 100 +++++++-------
 07-github.md                         |  85 ++++++------
 08-collab.md                         |  45 ++++---
 09-conflict.md                       | 250 +++++++++++++++++++++--------------
 14-supplemental-rstudio.md           |   8 +-
 discuss.md                           | 130 +++++++++---------
 fig/git-freshly-made-github-repo.svg |   4 +-
 fig/github-collaboration.svg         |  10 +-
 fig/github-repo-after-first-push.svg |   6 +-
 index.md                             |   8 +-
 instructor-notes.md                  |   8 +-
 md5sum.txt                           |  24 ++--
 16 files changed, 666 insertions(+), 569 deletions(-)

What does this mean?

If you have source files that require output and figures to be generated (e.g. R Markdown), then it is important to make sure the generated figures and output are reproducible.

This output provides a way for you to inspect the output in a diff-friendly manner so that it's easy to see the changes that occur due to new software versions or randomisation.

⏱️ Updated at 2024-09-18 12:43:15 +0000

[martinosorb]

@nsoranzo thank you so much for your suggestions. After searching around for established conventions, I agree both with the idea of capitalizing Git and with using present tense rather than present continuous in commit messages. However, these are changes that are unrelated to this pull request. Any reason why you wanted to suggest this here? It would be best to create another PR after this one has been merged (if it's approved). Thank you though.

[nsoranzo]

@nsoranzo thank you so much for your suggestions. After searching around for established conventions, I agree both with the idea of capitalizing Git and with using present tense rather than present continuous in commit messages. However, these are changes that are unrelated to this pull request. Any reason why you wanted to suggest this here? It would be best to create another PR after this one has been merged (if it's approved). Thank you though.

Thanks for looking into my suggestions! I partially agree with your reply:

• For capitalising Git, this is already the case in most of the episodes and my suggestions where only for a new callout, so I cannot do that in a separate PR. Actually I wanted to suggest that the new callout should go in a separate PR 😄
• For the use of imperative rather than the -ing form, I can do that for the current version of the lesson, but then it would conflict with your changes here, let me know if that's your preferred choice.

[tobyhodges]

On the whole, this looks good and results in less of a change (in practical terms) than I had expected. I have suggested a minor change to the Markdown syntax used in the examples: having multiple h1 headings in a file is bad practice from an accessibility standpoint, so I have suggested h2 headings (##) instead.

A few other miscellaneous questions and suggestions too.

[tobyhodges]

If and when #1013 is merged, I will be happy to approve this.

[dpshelio]

Ups! I didn't see your comment, @tobyhodges - I merged also #1012 into #1013 because it was producing a lot of merge conflicts. Hopefully that doesn't change your mind Oh! I saw it doesn't 😇

[martinosorb]

I've incorporated the suggestions by @dpshelio, @nsoranzo, and @tobyhodges. The only conversation left is about the sentence "A supplemental episode to this lesson discusses advanced setup and concepts of SSH and key pairs, and other material supplemental to git related SSH" that was introduced, and probably refers to something internal to UCL, I'm guessing. I will now proceed and merge #1013. After that, we can all set a date for merging. At that point, I will rebase and fix the conflicts.

[dpshelio]

Nothing to do with UCL 😇 - that was introduced in 2021 by @kekoziar
2b4bdb0#diff-6630f5f1e305bfd380d35f1f94de9c6c1c8f706ee2671c875f05db70b42f2dacR88-R90
and removed last year
d01e39b

[MGomezN]

Hello! I'm a git-novice-es-maintainer
I missed/forgot this 👇🏽 , but I'm happy to help update the Spanish version once this PR is approved.

Ask @swcarpentry/git-novice-es-maintainers how much would this affect the Spanish language fork and whether they are ok with updating their translation accordingly

[jas58]

This is so cool! Thank you for the the revisions and work!

[chennesy]

These look like great improvements, many thanks to all who worked on them!
@kekoziar @martinosorb: is there a target date for approving the PR? I have instructors planning to teach this on Sept 26, and want to make sure we know which version will be live since these are pretty significant changes.

[jas58]

Cody, It looks fairly complete and would be ready for teaching next week. Just a bit tricky to share the right website? ~~ jaws

…

On Fri, Sep 13, 2024, 10:40 AM Cody Hennesy ***@***.***> wrote: These look like great improvements, many thanks to all who worked on them! @kekoziar <https://github.com/kekoziar> @martinosorb <https://github.com/martinosorb>: is there a target date for approving the PR? I have instructors planning to teach this on Sept 26, and want to make sure we know which version will be live since these are pretty significant changes. — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#1003 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AMT5MX5F6GDUE7GU4XDBGJLZWMBPPAVCNFSM6AAAAABKKEZRESVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDGNBZGI2DQMRRG4> . You are receiving this because you commented.Message ID: ***@***.***>

[martinosorb]

Paging @tobyhodges on timing. If you guys would like to have this version for your workshop, I think we could arrange to have it merged before then.

[chennesy]

Thanks @martinosorb @tobyhodges Our instructors noted they won't have much time to review the changes in their prep before their workshop so are wondering if it would be OK to wait until after Sept 26, 2024 1800 UTC to merge the PR?

[martinosorb]

@jas58 @chennesy, we will then merge between the 27th and 30th of September. Thanks.

[martinosorb]

Thanks for catching that typo @jd-foster.