Put ahoy deploy steps into block; add notes on git merge/rebase

index.md

@@ -45,6 +45,7 @@ maxdepth: 2
 ---
 
 tools/git-setup
+tools/git-usage
 tools/setting-up-nextcloud
 tools/setting-up-email
 tools/creating-new-drutopia-site

tools/deploying-drutopia-updates.md

@@ -55,6 +55,22 @@ ahoy deploy-build next
 ahoy deploy-site example_test
 ```
 
+## Putting it all together
+
+```bash
+cd ~/Projects/drutopia-platform/drutopia_host/hosting_private
+ahoy git-pull-all        
+ahoy deploy-build next
+ahoy deploy-site example_live
+```
+
+## If you need to override site configuration:
+
+```bash
+ahoy deploy-site-force example_test
+```
+
+
 
 ## Bonus: Keep Drutopia builds with similar available modules
 

tools/git-usage.md

@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
 
 ## When NOT to manually resolve merge conflicts
 
-When it's an automatically generated file!
+When it is an automatically generated file!
 
 For `composer.lock`, for example:
 
@@ -12,3 +12,14 @@ ddev composer update
 git add composer.lock
 git commit
 ```
+
+## Bringing feature branches into main
+
+
+
+It is OK to do git merges rather than rebase on top of the main branch, especially when in the GitLab UI where merge is the only option— but be absolutely certain "Squash commits" is **not** checked.
+
+
+### Discussion
+
+Hmm git GUIs would show all the commits in the branch they were worked on when there are merge requests, right? (if not squashed?) Maybe better to prefer merges than rebases for feature branches, for preserving the history of where the work was done. My problem with git merge commits is they can rewrite history inside them, like have changes not shown in any other commit, and they make it hard to see what happened— does not show up in git log -p for instance. (You can see the history but if the stack overflow explanation does not fit on one page i don't want it as part of my daily workflow. https://stackoverflow.com/a/40986893/1028376 )