FreeRADIUS users#701
Merged
jaredhendrickson13 merged 2 commits intopfrest:next_minorfrom May 30, 2025
Merged
Conversation
Member
|
All these changes appear to already be present on the next_minor branch from your previous PR. Are there commits that are missing from your branch? |
…)Endpoint.inc - Endpoints comments fixed
Contributor
Author
|
my bad.
One more commit added on 26.05.2025 to remove now unused FreeRADIUSUser.inc
and fix Endpoints comments. I can create PR if required. Thanks!
…On Mon, 26 May 2025 at 19:26, Jared Hendrickson ***@***.***> wrote:
*jaredhendrickson13* left a comment (pfrest/pfSense-pkg-RESTAPI#701)
<#701 (comment)>
All these changes appear to already be present on the next_minor branch
<https://github.com/jaredhendrickson13/pfsense-api/tree/next_minor> from
your previous PR. Are there commits that are missing from your branch?
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#701 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AXK53FESU4RJQCUHQ2BRGUL3AM6CRAVCNFSM6AAAAAB5UEKFGSVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDSMJQGIZDANZVGA>
.
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.Message ID:
***@***.***>
--
CU,
Victor Gamov
|
Member
|
Looks good to me now. If you could resolve the conflicts or rebase your branch against the Thanks! |
Contributor
Author
|
Hi Jared
I made one more (cosmetic) commit in Models/FreeRADIUSUser.inc. Also I
have one more branch on my repo with new Endpoint/Model and send PR.
All just before red your email.
So which best approach to rebase to next_minor now?
…On Thu, 29 May 2025 at 08:16, Jared Hendrickson ***@***.***> wrote:
*jaredhendrickson13* left a comment (pfrest/pfSense-pkg-RESTAPI#701)
<#701 (comment)>
Looks good to me now. If you could resolve the conflicts or rebase your
branch against the next_minor branch I'll merge this in and have it
included in v2.5.0.
Thanks!
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#701 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AXK53FA3DD5Z6T6VXAGBIOL3A2J3NAVCNFSM6AAAAAB5UEKFGSVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDSMJYGMYTSMZTGA>
.
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.Message ID:
***@***.***>
--
CU,
Victor Gamov
|
Member
|
You should be able to resolve the conflicts directly within this pull request on GitHub, that is probably the easiest option. Or you could enable the 'Allow edits from maintainers' option in the PR to allow me to resolve those conflicts for you if you'd rather. |
Contributor
Author
|
GitHub didn't allow to resolve conflict via the web due "These conflicts
are too complex to resolve in the web editor."
Can I try to rebase my local FreeRADIUS branch to next_minor like this:
- git checkout FreeRADIUS-users
- git remote add next_minor ***@***.***:
jaredhendrickson13/pfsense-api.git
- git fetch next_minor next_minor:next_minor
At this point I have next_minor brach on my local computer
- git rebase next_minor/next_minor
failed with:
error: could not apply b9d927e... - wrong named FreeRADIUSUser.inc deleted
due ServicesFreeRADIUSUser(s)Endpoint.inc
hint: Resolve all conflicts manually, mark them as resolved with
hint: "git add/rm <conflicted_files>", then run "git rebase --continue".
hint: You can instead skip this commit: run "git rebase --skip".
hint: To abort and get back to the state before "git rebase", run "git
rebase --abort".
- git rm
pfSense-pkg-RESTAPI/files/usr/local/pkg/RESTAPI/Endpoints/FreeRADIUSUser.inc
- git rebase --continue
Now rebase is successfully finished. As I understand at this point my
local FreeRADIUS-users branch is fully based on remote next_minor with all
my changes.
Is it OK to 'git push' now to my remote like:
git push ***@***.***:vitspec99/pfsense-api.git
Does it help to resolve the current conflict? Or do I need to find
another way to do it?
…On Fri, 30 May 2025 at 07:48, Jared Hendrickson ***@***.***> wrote:
*jaredhendrickson13* left a comment (pfrest/pfSense-pkg-RESTAPI#701)
<#701 (comment)>
You should be able to resolve the conflicts directly within this pull
request on GitHub, that is probably the easiest option. Or you could enable
the 'Allow edits from maintainers' option in the PR to allow me to resolve
those conflicts for you if you'd rather.
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#701 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AXK53FDITC77SONI3LT4XQ33A7PIZAVCNFSM6AAAAAB5UEKFGSVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDSMRRGIYTSMJTGE>
.
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.Message ID:
***@***.***>
--
CU,
Victor Gamov
|
jaredhendrickson13
approved these changes
May 30, 2025
Member
|
No worries, I was able to cherry-pick your commits into next_minor to resolve conflicts. Thanks! |
Merged
Contributor
Author
|
Great news! Thanks!
Anyway, which is the best approach to add more functionality to the API
now? Do I need to rebase to next_minor for all my current local branches
(and then push to my remote GitHub repo) to avoid conflicts in future
PRs? If I create my new github/local branch for new Endpoints/Models which
RESTAPI branch must be used? Is just changing the "Default branch" setting
in my GitHub fork from 'master' to 'next_minor' and following 'git pull' on
my local repo will be enough?
Thanks for your advice!
…On Fri, 30 May 2025 at 23:47, Jared Hendrickson ***@***.***> wrote:
*jaredhendrickson13* left a comment (pfrest/pfSense-pkg-RESTAPI#701)
<#701 (comment)>
No worries, I was able to cherry-pick your commits into next_minor to
resolve conflicts. Thanks!
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#701 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AXK53FHM5ATQ3CH7C73MPOT3BC7V7AVCNFSM6AAAAAB5UEKFGSVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDSMRTGQ2TAMRQGM>
.
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.Message ID:
***@***.***>
--
CU,
Victor Gamov
|
Member
|
Usually they can just be based on In general though, I prefer to merge feature requests and breaking changes into If you haven't already, you can add the upstream repo to your fork: Fetch the upstream repo so its up-to-date: Then on your branch, you can merge in changes from the upstream |
Contributor
Author
|
I see. Thanks for your advice!
…On Sat, 31 May 2025 at 19:17, Jared Hendrickson ***@***.***> wrote:
*jaredhendrickson13* left a comment (pfrest/pfSense-pkg-RESTAPI#701)
<#701 (comment)>
Usually they can just be based on master and I can determine the best
target to merge them into (like next_minor) without conflicts. This
situation was a little different since the previous PR was merged into
next_minor but additional changes were made to the same branch afterward
based on master.
In general though, I prefer to merge feature requests and breaking changes
into next_minor so if your branches are kept up to date with that branch
you'd be less likely to run into similar conflicts going forward.
If you haven't already, you can add the upstream repo to your fork:
git remote add upstream ***@***.***:jaredhendrickson13/pfsense-api.git
Fetch the upstream repo so its up-to-date:
git fetch upstream
Then on your branch, you can merge in changes from the upstream next_minor
branch to keep it up to date. If there are conflicts when you merge in the
changes you'll need to address those locally:
git merge upstream/next_minor
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#701 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AXK53FGWCTKFOUQARWR57SL3BHIYHAVCNFSM6AAAAAB5UEKFGSVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDSMRVGM4TMOJYGE>
.
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.Message ID:
***@***.***>
--
CU,
Victor Gamov
|
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Hi!
This is my new PR to sync my latest changes: