* Re: New branch for No Gnus
2012-01-31 17:02 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
@ 2012-01-31 17:07 ` Richard Riley
2012-01-31 17:14 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
2012-01-31 18:36 ` Raphael Kubo da Costa
` (2 subsequent siblings)
3 siblings, 1 reply; 60+ messages in thread
From: Richard Riley @ 2012-01-31 17:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ding
Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org> writes:
> Ok, the new No Gnus branch has been created, and Ma Gnus has been
> started. Let's see whether I can actually do merges now, then. :-)
>
> But I guess I don't really want to merge No Gnus as is into master. I
> just want to cherry-pick any commits I make, I guess? I certainly don't
> want to merge the commit I just did that bumped the version number to No
> Gnus 0.20, for instance.
>
> So how do I cherry-pick commits?
So which branch do those of us wanting new fixes/updates now
clone/checkout? Any emacs pulling in a "stable" gnus can surely do it
from tag id or checkin hash? I guess I've kind of lost what master is
supposed to be now.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 60+ messages in thread
* Re: New branch for No Gnus
2012-01-31 17:07 ` Richard Riley
@ 2012-01-31 17:14 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
2012-01-31 17:50 ` Richard Riley
0 siblings, 1 reply; 60+ messages in thread
From: Lars Ingebrigtsen @ 2012-01-31 17:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ding
Richard Riley <rileyrg@gmail.com> writes:
> So which branch do those of us wanting new fixes/updates now
> clone/checkout? Any emacs pulling in a "stable" gnus can surely do it
> from tag id or checkin hash? I guess I've kind of lost what master is
> supposed to be now.
Development is on the master branch. Bug fixes on the no-gnus branch.
--
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no * Sent from my Rome
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 60+ messages in thread
* Re: New branch for No Gnus
2012-01-31 17:14 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
@ 2012-01-31 17:50 ` Richard Riley
0 siblings, 0 replies; 60+ messages in thread
From: Richard Riley @ 2012-01-31 17:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ding
Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org> writes:
> Richard Riley <rileyrg@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> So which branch do those of us wanting new fixes/updates now
>> clone/checkout? Any emacs pulling in a "stable" gnus can surely do it
>> from tag id or checkin hash? I guess I've kind of lost what master is
>> supposed to be now.
>
> Development is on the master branch. Bug fixes on the no-gnus branch.
So no-gnus is released gnus with critical bug fixes? And master is
"latest being worked on"?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 60+ messages in thread
* Re: New branch for No Gnus
2012-01-31 17:02 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
2012-01-31 17:07 ` Richard Riley
@ 2012-01-31 18:36 ` Raphael Kubo da Costa
2012-01-31 18:44 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
2012-01-31 20:56 ` Steinar Bang
2012-02-01 1:47 ` Michael Welsh Duggan
3 siblings, 1 reply; 60+ messages in thread
From: Raphael Kubo da Costa @ 2012-01-31 18:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ding
Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org> writes:
> But I guess I don't really want to merge No Gnus as is into master. I
> just want to cherry-pick any commits I make, I guess? I certainly don't
> want to merge the commit I just did that bumped the version number to No
> Gnus 0.20, for instance.
You'd get a merge conflict at that point when merging anyway, so I don't
think this kind of thing would end up slipping under the radar.
> So how do I cherry-pick commits?
git cherry-pick [-x] [--edit] <COMMIT>, where <COMMIT> can be the SHA-1
hash or any other way of pointing to a certain commit. I still think
merging makes more sense, though.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 60+ messages in thread
* Re: New branch for No Gnus
2012-01-31 18:36 ` Raphael Kubo da Costa
@ 2012-01-31 18:44 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
2012-01-31 18:52 ` Raphael Kubo da Costa
` (2 more replies)
0 siblings, 3 replies; 60+ messages in thread
From: Lars Ingebrigtsen @ 2012-01-31 18:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Raphael Kubo da Costa; +Cc: ding
Raphael Kubo da Costa <rakuco@FreeBSD.org> writes:
> You'd get a merge conflict at that point when merging anyway, so I don't
> think this kind of thing would end up slipping under the radar.
So I should just merge, and then delete all the stuff that Git put into
Ma Gnus from No Gnus? (I mean, right now. None of the changes to No
Gnus, which are just version numbers, apply to Ma Gnus.)
And then after doing that, then all further changes will just apply
nicely? I mean, if I then do an actual bug fix in No Gnus, and then
merge that into Ma Gnus? That'd be nice. :-)
>> So how do I cherry-pick commits?
>
> git cherry-pick [-x] [--edit] <COMMIT>, where <COMMIT> can be the SHA-1
> hash or any other way of pointing to a certain commit. I still think
> merging makes more sense, though.
Right.
--
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no * Sent from my Rome
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 60+ messages in thread
* Re: New branch for No Gnus
2012-01-31 18:44 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
@ 2012-01-31 18:52 ` Raphael Kubo da Costa
2012-01-31 18:58 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
2012-01-31 19:59 ` Andreas Schwab
2012-01-31 20:59 ` Steinar Bang
2 siblings, 1 reply; 60+ messages in thread
From: Raphael Kubo da Costa @ 2012-01-31 18:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ding
Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org> writes:
> So I should just merge, and then delete all the stuff that Git put into
> Ma Gnus from No Gnus? (I mean, right now. None of the changes to No
> Gnus, which are just version numbers, apply to Ma Gnus.)
Yes. Depending on how much free time you have these days, you might also
want to take a look at git merge's different merge strategies, and also
the `git rerere' command, which records conflict resolutions for the
future.
> And then after doing that, then all further changes will just apply
> nicely? I mean, if I then do an actual bug fix in No Gnus, and then
> merge that into Ma Gnus? That'd be nice. :-)
That's the idea ;)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 60+ messages in thread
* Re: New branch for No Gnus
2012-01-31 18:52 ` Raphael Kubo da Costa
@ 2012-01-31 18:58 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
2012-01-31 19:15 ` Raphael Kubo da Costa
0 siblings, 1 reply; 60+ messages in thread
From: Lars Ingebrigtsen @ 2012-01-31 18:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Raphael Kubo da Costa; +Cc: ding
Raphael Kubo da Costa <rakuco@FreeBSD.org> writes:
> Yes. Depending on how much free time you have these days, you might also
> want to take a look at git merge's different merge strategies, and also
> the `git rerere' command, which records conflict resolutions for the
> future.
Do I need the "git rerere" if I never do a "git reset"?
--
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no * Sent from my Rome
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 60+ messages in thread
* Re: New branch for No Gnus
2012-01-31 18:58 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
@ 2012-01-31 19:15 ` Raphael Kubo da Costa
0 siblings, 0 replies; 60+ messages in thread
From: Raphael Kubo da Costa @ 2012-01-31 19:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ding
Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org> writes:
> Raphael Kubo da Costa <rakuco@FreeBSD.org> writes:
>
>> Yes. Depending on how much free time you have these days, you might also
>> want to take a look at git merge's different merge strategies, and also
>> the `git rerere' command, which records conflict resolutions for the
>> future.
>
> Do I need the "git rerere" if I never do a "git reset"?
I don't think I've fully understood the question; both commands seem
orthogonal to me. Progit [1] will probably make more sense than anything
I say :)
[1] http://progit.org/2010/03/08/rerere.html
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 60+ messages in thread
* Re: New branch for No Gnus
2012-01-31 18:44 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
2012-01-31 18:52 ` Raphael Kubo da Costa
@ 2012-01-31 19:59 ` Andreas Schwab
2012-01-31 20:59 ` Steinar Bang
2 siblings, 0 replies; 60+ messages in thread
From: Andreas Schwab @ 2012-01-31 19:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Lars Ingebrigtsen; +Cc: Raphael Kubo da Costa, ding
Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org> writes:
> So I should just merge, and then delete all the stuff that Git put into
> Ma Gnus from No Gnus? (I mean, right now. None of the changes to No
> Gnus, which are just version numbers, apply to Ma Gnus.)
You will get a merge conflict, which you resolve.
$ git merge origin/no-gnus
Auto-merging texi/message.texi
CONFLICT (content): Merge conflict in texi/message.texi
Auto-merging texi/gnus.texi
CONFLICT (content): Merge conflict in texi/gnus.texi
Auto-merging lisp/gnus.el
CONFLICT (content): Merge conflict in lisp/gnus.el
Auto-merging lisp/ChangeLog
Recorded preimage for 'lisp/gnus.el'
Recorded preimage for 'texi/gnus.texi'
Recorded preimage for 'texi/message.texi'
Automatic merge failed; fix conflicts and then commit the result.
The messages about recording preimage are part of the rerere support.
There is no conflict report for lisp/ChangeLog since I have set up
git-merge-changelog. Use git reset --merge to abort a failed merge.
Andreas.
--
Andreas Schwab, schwab@linux-m68k.org
GPG Key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756 01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5
"And now for something completely different."
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 60+ messages in thread
* Re: New branch for No Gnus
2012-01-31 18:44 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
2012-01-31 18:52 ` Raphael Kubo da Costa
2012-01-31 19:59 ` Andreas Schwab
@ 2012-01-31 20:59 ` Steinar Bang
2012-01-31 22:49 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
2012-01-31 22:50 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
2 siblings, 2 replies; 60+ messages in thread
From: Steinar Bang @ 2012-01-31 20:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ding
>>>>> Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org>:
> So I should just merge, and then delete all the stuff that Git put into
> Ma Gnus from No Gnus? (I mean, right now. None of the changes to No
> Gnus, which are just version numbers, apply to Ma Gnus.)
If you know that the current changes in no-gnus that differ from master
don't apply, then just
git fetch
git merge -s ours orgin/no-gnus
and you won't be bothered by those changes on future merges (until those
files change again)
"-s ours" means "make it look like a merge, but all stuff on the current
branch stays the way it is".
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 60+ messages in thread
* Re: New branch for No Gnus
2012-01-31 20:59 ` Steinar Bang
@ 2012-01-31 22:49 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
2012-02-01 0:07 ` Raphael Kubo da Costa
2012-01-31 22:50 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
1 sibling, 1 reply; 60+ messages in thread
From: Lars Ingebrigtsen @ 2012-01-31 22:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ding
Steinar Bang <sb@dod.no> writes:
> If you know that the current changes in no-gnus that differ from master
> don't apply, then just
> git fetch
> git merge -s ours orgin/no-gnus
> and you won't be bothered by those changes on future merges (until those
> files change again)
>
> "-s ours" means "make it look like a merge, but all stuff on the current
> branch stays the way it is".
Great! That has to be just what I need right now, I think, since none
of the changes I made to No Gnus should end up in Ma Gnus.
I'll try that now...
--
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no * Sent from my Rome
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 60+ messages in thread
* Re: New branch for No Gnus
2012-01-31 22:49 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
@ 2012-02-01 0:07 ` Raphael Kubo da Costa
2012-02-01 0:31 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
` (2 more replies)
0 siblings, 3 replies; 60+ messages in thread
From: Raphael Kubo da Costa @ 2012-02-01 0:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ding
Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org> writes:
> Steinar Bang <sb@dod.no> writes:
>
>> If you know that the current changes in no-gnus that differ from master
>> don't apply, then just
>> git fetch
>> git merge -s ours orgin/no-gnus
>> and you won't be bothered by those changes on future merges (until those
>> files change again)
>>
>> "-s ours" means "make it look like a merge, but all stuff on the current
>> branch stays the way it is".
>
> Great! That has to be just what I need right now, I think, since none
> of the changes I made to No Gnus should end up in Ma Gnus.
>
> I'll try that now...
Are you sure "-s ours" is what you are looking for? If you are on branch
master and use `git merge -s ours no-gnus`, it will effectively bring
no-gnus' history in, but discard _all_ changes from no-gnus.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 60+ messages in thread
* Re: New branch for No Gnus
2012-02-01 0:07 ` Raphael Kubo da Costa
@ 2012-02-01 0:31 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
2012-02-01 0:40 ` Raphael Kubo da Costa
2012-02-01 0:36 ` Andreas Schwab
2012-02-01 0:38 ` Katsumi Yamaoka
2 siblings, 1 reply; 60+ messages in thread
From: Lars Ingebrigtsen @ 2012-02-01 0:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Raphael Kubo da Costa; +Cc: ding
Raphael Kubo da Costa <rakuco@FreeBSD.org> writes:
> Are you sure "-s ours" is what you are looking for? If you are on branch
> master and use `git merge -s ours no-gnus`, it will effectively bring
> no-gnus' history in, but discard _all_ changes from no-gnus.
I didn't want the history, either, but I did want to discard all the
changes.
--
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no * Sent from my Rome
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 60+ messages in thread
* Re: New branch for No Gnus
2012-02-01 0:31 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
@ 2012-02-01 0:40 ` Raphael Kubo da Costa
2012-02-01 8:46 ` Steinar Bang
0 siblings, 1 reply; 60+ messages in thread
From: Raphael Kubo da Costa @ 2012-02-01 0:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ding
Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org> writes:
> Raphael Kubo da Costa <rakuco@FreeBSD.org> writes:
>
>> Are you sure "-s ours" is what you are looking for? If you are on branch
>> master and use `git merge -s ours no-gnus`, it will effectively bring
>> no-gnus' history in, but discard _all_ changes from no-gnus.
>
> I didn't want the history, either, but I did want to discard all the
> changes.
I thought the opposite was the desired outcome? I mean, if you are in
master and merge no-gnus, you'd want the commits made to no-gnus in the
commit log and also the bug fixes they bring. If you use "-s ours",
you'll only get the history, but all the commit contents (ie. bug fixes)
will be dropped.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 60+ messages in thread
* Re: New branch for No Gnus
2012-02-01 0:40 ` Raphael Kubo da Costa
@ 2012-02-01 8:46 ` Steinar Bang
0 siblings, 0 replies; 60+ messages in thread
From: Steinar Bang @ 2012-02-01 8:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ding
>>>>> Raphael Kubo da Costa <rakuco@FreeBSD.org>:
> I thought the opposite was the desired outcome? I mean, if you are in
> master and merge no-gnus, you'd want the commits made to no-gnus in
> the commit log and also the bug fixes they bring. If you use "-s
> ours", you'll only get the history, but all the commit contents
> (ie. bug fixes) will be dropped.
The no-gnus branch had just recently been created off master, so the two
branches shared ancestry except for the two commits that weren't
supposed to be applied to master (version number changes).
Until those version number files are touched again, regular merge can be
used.
Once those files are touched again, either
1. "git merge --no-ff --no-commit origin/no-gnus" and revert the
undesired files
or
2. Do a "git merge sha1-of-commit-before-the-version-change-commits"
followed by a "git merge -s ours origin/no-gnus" (or merge with the
sha1 of the latest commit, if the version number commits are not at
the head of the no-gnus branch)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 60+ messages in thread
* Re: New branch for No Gnus
2012-02-01 0:07 ` Raphael Kubo da Costa
2012-02-01 0:31 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
@ 2012-02-01 0:36 ` Andreas Schwab
2012-02-01 0:38 ` Katsumi Yamaoka
2 siblings, 0 replies; 60+ messages in thread
From: Andreas Schwab @ 2012-02-01 0:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Raphael Kubo da Costa; +Cc: ding
Raphael Kubo da Costa <rakuco@FreeBSD.org> writes:
> Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org> writes:
>
>> Steinar Bang <sb@dod.no> writes:
>>
>>> If you know that the current changes in no-gnus that differ from master
>>> don't apply, then just
>>> git fetch
>>> git merge -s ours orgin/no-gnus
>>> and you won't be bothered by those changes on future merges (until those
>>> files change again)
>>>
>>> "-s ours" means "make it look like a merge, but all stuff on the current
>>> branch stays the way it is".
>>
>> Great! That has to be just what I need right now, I think, since none
>> of the changes I made to No Gnus should end up in Ma Gnus.
>>
>> I'll try that now...
>
> Are you sure "-s ours" is what you are looking for? If you are on branch
> master and use `git merge -s ours no-gnus`, it will effectively bring
> no-gnus' history in, but discard _all_ changes from no-gnus.
The two commits that were merged here are only intended for the no-gnus
branch, so it looks good.
Andreas.
--
Andreas Schwab, schwab@linux-m68k.org
GPG Key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756 01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5
"And now for something completely different."
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 60+ messages in thread
* Re: New branch for No Gnus
2012-02-01 0:07 ` Raphael Kubo da Costa
2012-02-01 0:31 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
2012-02-01 0:36 ` Andreas Schwab
@ 2012-02-01 0:38 ` Katsumi Yamaoka
2012-02-01 1:13 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
2 siblings, 1 reply; 60+ messages in thread
From: Katsumi Yamaoka @ 2012-02-01 0:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ding
Er, is it me who broke the no-gnus branch?
Now it looks like having been overridden by the trunk.
$ grep gnus-version ngnus/lisp/gnus.el
(defconst gnus-version-number "0.2"
(defconst gnus-version (format "Ma Gnus v%s" gnus-version-number)
gnus-version (gnus-emacs-version)))
I did the recipe, Steinar Bang wrote in <87aa54riih.fsf@dod.no>.
The cvslog list did no report about it so far, though.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 60+ messages in thread
* Re: New branch for No Gnus
2012-02-01 0:38 ` Katsumi Yamaoka
@ 2012-02-01 1:13 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
2012-02-01 1:32 ` Katsumi Yamaoka
2012-02-01 8:24 ` Steinar Bang
0 siblings, 2 replies; 60+ messages in thread
From: Lars Ingebrigtsen @ 2012-02-01 1:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Katsumi Yamaoka; +Cc: ding
Katsumi Yamaoka <yamaoka@jpl.org> writes:
> Er, is it me who broke the no-gnus branch?
I think so. :-) I sent you an email a while ago...
> Now it looks like having been overridden by the trunk.
[...]
> I did the recipe, Steinar Bang wrote in <87aa54riih.fsf@dod.no>.
Yeah, that was just for creating the branch and stuff. You should just
have to have done "cvs checkout no-gnus" to get the No Gnus branch.
Nothing further would have been necessary, I think?
Anyway, anybody know what's the best way to clean this up? Does git
have a total "rollback" feature? Or is it better to just apply
reverse-patches to the No Gnus branch?
And the ma-gnus branch has to be deleted, but that's easy, I think. I
think I saw that somewhere...
--
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no * Sent from my Rome
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 60+ messages in thread
* Re: New branch for No Gnus
2012-02-01 1:13 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
@ 2012-02-01 1:32 ` Katsumi Yamaoka
2012-02-01 2:22 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
2012-02-01 8:24 ` Steinar Bang
1 sibling, 1 reply; 60+ messages in thread
From: Katsumi Yamaoka @ 2012-02-01 1:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ding
Lars Ingebrigtsen wrote:
> Katsumi Yamaoka <yamaoka@jpl.org> writes:
>> Er, is it me who broke the no-gnus branch?
> I think so. :-) I sent you an email a while ago...
Oops, sorry. Could you please fix it? I'm not fit for doing it,
since I'm quite capable of making other problems. (^^;;)
[...]
>> I did the recipe, Steinar Bang wrote in <87aa54riih.fsf@dod.no>.
> Yeah, that was just for creating the branch and stuff. You should just
> have to have done "cvs checkout no-gnus" to get the No Gnus branch.
> Nothing further would have been necessary, I think?
> Anyway, anybody know what's the best way to clean this up? Does git
> have a total "rollback" feature? Or is it better to just apply
> reverse-patches to the No Gnus branch?
> And the ma-gnus branch has to be deleted, but that's easy, I think. I
> think I saw that somewhere...
TIA
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 60+ messages in thread
* Re: New branch for No Gnus
2012-02-01 1:32 ` Katsumi Yamaoka
@ 2012-02-01 2:22 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
2012-02-01 2:33 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
0 siblings, 1 reply; 60+ messages in thread
From: Lars Ingebrigtsen @ 2012-02-01 2:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Katsumi Yamaoka; +Cc: ding
Katsumi Yamaoka <yamaoka@jpl.org> writes:
> Oops, sorry. Could you please fix it? I'm not fit for doing it,
> since I'm quite capable of making other problems. (^^;;)
I think I probably fixed it now...
--
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no * Sent from my Rome
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 60+ messages in thread
* Re: New branch for No Gnus
2012-02-01 2:22 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
@ 2012-02-01 2:33 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
2012-02-01 8:51 ` Steinar Bang
0 siblings, 1 reply; 60+ messages in thread
From: Lars Ingebrigtsen @ 2012-02-01 2:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ding
Ok, now things look almost OK, so I'm going to bed. The only thing that
remains is to delete the ma-gnus branch on git.gnus.org...
--
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no * Sent from my Rome
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 60+ messages in thread
* Re: New branch for No Gnus
2012-02-01 2:33 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
@ 2012-02-01 8:51 ` Steinar Bang
2012-02-01 13:03 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
0 siblings, 1 reply; 60+ messages in thread
From: Steinar Bang @ 2012-02-01 8:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ding
>>>>> Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org>:
> Ok, now things look almost OK, so I'm going to bed. The only thing that
> remains is to delete the ma-gnus branch on git.gnus.org...
git push origin :ma-gnus
(`M-x man RET git-push RET' followed by a search for "origin :experimental"
(without the quotes))
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 60+ messages in thread
* Re: New branch for No Gnus
2012-02-01 8:51 ` Steinar Bang
@ 2012-02-01 13:03 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
2012-02-01 14:30 ` Steinar Bang
0 siblings, 1 reply; 60+ messages in thread
From: Lars Ingebrigtsen @ 2012-02-01 13:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ding
Steinar Bang <sb@dod.no> writes:
> git push origin :ma-gnus
larsi@rusty:~/mgnus$ git push origin :ma-gnus
remote: error: denying ref deletion for refs/heads/ma-gnus
--
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no * Sent from my Rome
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 60+ messages in thread
* Re: New branch for No Gnus
2012-02-01 13:03 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
@ 2012-02-01 14:30 ` Steinar Bang
2012-02-01 18:26 ` Ted Zlatanov
0 siblings, 1 reply; 60+ messages in thread
From: Steinar Bang @ 2012-02-01 14:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ding
>>>>> Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org>:
> Steinar Bang <sb@dod.no> writes:
>> git push origin :ma-gnus
> larsi@rusty:~/mgnus$ git push origin :ma-gnus
> remote: error: denying ref deletion for refs/heads/ma-gnus
Some possible causes here:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/5723511/how-do-i-remove-a-remote-branch-when-i-get-an-error
Summary of possible causes:
1. privileges of the user
2. remote repo has "denyDeletes = true" in its config
There is a brute force workaround at the end of the StackOverflow
thread: log in on the remote server, and to "branch -D ma-gnus" in the
repository there
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 60+ messages in thread
* Re: New branch for No Gnus
2012-02-01 14:30 ` Steinar Bang
@ 2012-02-01 18:26 ` Ted Zlatanov
2012-02-01 18:30 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
0 siblings, 1 reply; 60+ messages in thread
From: Ted Zlatanov @ 2012-02-01 18:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ding
On Wed, 01 Feb 2012 15:30:00 +0100 Steinar Bang <sb@dod.no> wrote:
>>>>>> Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org>:
>> larsi@rusty:~/mgnus$ git push origin :ma-gnus
>> remote: error: denying ref deletion for refs/heads/ma-gnus
SB> Summary of possible causes:
SB> 1. privileges of the user
SB> 2. remote repo has "denyDeletes = true" in its config
SB> There is a brute force workaround at the end of the StackOverflow
SB> thread: log in on the remote server, and to "branch -D ma-gnus" in the
SB> repository there
On Wed, 01 Feb 2012 12:31:03 +0100 Andreas Schwab <schwab@linux-m68k.org> wrote:
AS> You always need to pull first, since the server will not allow
AS> non-fast-forward pushes.
We deny deletes and non-fast forwards over HTTP on the Gnus Git repo, so
Lars or I can delete a branch manually if it ever is necessary. I would
have helped with this normally, but was not available for the fun yesterday.
Ted
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 60+ messages in thread
* Re: New branch for No Gnus
2012-02-01 18:26 ` Ted Zlatanov
@ 2012-02-01 18:30 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
2012-02-01 18:56 ` Ted Zlatanov
0 siblings, 1 reply; 60+ messages in thread
From: Lars Ingebrigtsen @ 2012-02-01 18:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ding
Ted Zlatanov <tzz@lifelogs.com> writes:
> We deny deletes and non-fast forwards over HTTP on the Gnus Git repo, so
> Lars or I can delete a branch manually if it ever is necessary. I would
> have helped with this normally, but was not available for the fun yesterday.
Could you delete the ma-gnus branch?
--
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no * Sent from my Rome
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 60+ messages in thread
* Re: New branch for No Gnus
2012-02-01 18:30 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
@ 2012-02-01 18:56 ` Ted Zlatanov
2012-02-01 21:59 ` Steinar Bang
2012-02-01 22:43 ` Andreas Schwab
0 siblings, 2 replies; 60+ messages in thread
From: Ted Zlatanov @ 2012-02-01 18:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ding
On Wed, 01 Feb 2012 19:30:10 +0100 Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org> wrote:
LI> Ted Zlatanov <tzz@lifelogs.com> writes:
>> We deny deletes and non-fast forwards over HTTP on the Gnus Git repo, so
>> Lars or I can delete a branch manually if it ever is necessary. I would
>> have helped with this normally, but was not available for the fun yesterday.
LI> Could you delete the ma-gnus branch?
Done. People who made new clones in this troubled time will have
references to origin/ma-gnus but we can't help that.
Ted
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 60+ messages in thread
* Re: New branch for No Gnus
2012-02-01 18:56 ` Ted Zlatanov
@ 2012-02-01 21:59 ` Steinar Bang
2012-02-01 22:03 ` Ted Zlatanov
2012-02-01 22:43 ` Andreas Schwab
1 sibling, 1 reply; 60+ messages in thread
From: Steinar Bang @ 2012-02-01 21:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ding
>>>>> Ted Zlatanov <tzz@lifelogs.com>:
> Done. People who made new clones in this troubled time will have
> references to origin/ma-gnus but we can't help that.
If they do
git remote prune origin
it should fix things for them.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 60+ messages in thread
* Re: New branch for No Gnus
2012-02-01 21:59 ` Steinar Bang
@ 2012-02-01 22:03 ` Ted Zlatanov
2012-02-01 22:24 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
0 siblings, 1 reply; 60+ messages in thread
From: Ted Zlatanov @ 2012-02-01 22:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ding
On Wed, 01 Feb 2012 22:59:26 +0100 Steinar Bang <sb@dod.no> wrote:
>>>>>> Ted Zlatanov <tzz@lifelogs.com>:
>> Done. People who made new clones in this troubled time will have
>> references to origin/ma-gnus but we can't help that.
SB> If they do
SB> git remote prune origin
SB> it should fix things for them.
Nice trick, I didn't know this. We can't make that reference disappear
from their repo clone without some local command, unfortunately :) But
that should do it, and of course when we actually create a ma-gnus
branch things should Just Work.
Thanks
Ted
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 60+ messages in thread
* Re: New branch for No Gnus
2012-02-01 22:03 ` Ted Zlatanov
@ 2012-02-01 22:24 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
0 siblings, 0 replies; 60+ messages in thread
From: Lars Ingebrigtsen @ 2012-02-01 22:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ding
Ted Zlatanov <tzz@lifelogs.com> writes:
> Nice trick, I didn't know this. We can't make that reference disappear
> from their repo clone without some local command, unfortunately :) But
> that should do it, and of course when we actually create a ma-gnus
> branch things should Just Work.
Yup; works for me. Now "git branch -a" no longer lists the ma-gnus
branch.
--
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no * Sent from my Rome
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 60+ messages in thread
* Re: New branch for No Gnus
2012-02-01 18:56 ` Ted Zlatanov
2012-02-01 21:59 ` Steinar Bang
@ 2012-02-01 22:43 ` Andreas Schwab
1 sibling, 0 replies; 60+ messages in thread
From: Andreas Schwab @ 2012-02-01 22:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ding
Ted Zlatanov <tzz@lifelogs.com> writes:
> Done. People who made new clones in this troubled time will have
> references to origin/ma-gnus but we can't help that.
$ git fetch --prune
Andreas.
--
Andreas Schwab, schwab@linux-m68k.org
GPG Key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756 01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5
"And now for something completely different."
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 60+ messages in thread
* Re: New branch for No Gnus
2012-02-01 1:13 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
2012-02-01 1:32 ` Katsumi Yamaoka
@ 2012-02-01 8:24 ` Steinar Bang
1 sibling, 0 replies; 60+ messages in thread
From: Steinar Bang @ 2012-02-01 8:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ding
>>>>> Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org>:
> Yeah, that was just for creating the branch and stuff. You should just
> have to have done "cvs checkout no-gnus" to get the No Gnus branch.
"git checkout no-gnus", perhaps...? :-)
> Nothing further would have been necessary, I think?
Correct.
> Anyway, anybody know what's the best way to clean this up? Does git
> have a total "rollback" feature?
Oh yes! But it is somewhat dangerous (I have lost work this way):
git checkout no-gnus
git reset --hard sha1-of-last-commit-that-was-good
git push -f origin HEAD
(the last one, "push -f" after a reset, is somewhat rude if others have
pulled in the meantime, and started adding commits to the stuff that you
have reset. Should be used with utmost caution)
> Or is it better to just apply reverse-patches to the No Gnus branch?
Depends on what the branch was looking like after it was b0rked. But
since it is fixed now, I guess you're good...?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 60+ messages in thread
* Re: New branch for No Gnus
2012-01-31 20:59 ` Steinar Bang
2012-01-31 22:49 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
@ 2012-01-31 22:50 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
2012-01-31 22:59 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
1 sibling, 1 reply; 60+ messages in thread
From: Lars Ingebrigtsen @ 2012-01-31 22:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ding
Steinar Bang <sb@dod.no> writes:
> git fetch
> git merge -s ours orgin/no-gnus
larsi@rusty:~/mgnus$ git merge -s ours orgin/no-gnus
fatal: 'orgin/no-gnus' does not point to a commit
Hm.
--
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no * Sent from my Rome
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 60+ messages in thread
* Re: New branch for No Gnus
2012-01-31 22:50 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
@ 2012-01-31 22:59 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
2012-01-31 23:05 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
0 siblings, 1 reply; 60+ messages in thread
From: Lars Ingebrigtsen @ 2012-01-31 22:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ding
Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org> writes:
> larsi@rusty:~/mgnus$ git merge -s ours orgin/no-gnus
> fatal: 'orgin/no-gnus' does not point to a commit
"origin". Me so smart S.M.R.T.
And now I'll try to merge a real change made in No Gnus...
--
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no * Sent from my Rome
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 60+ messages in thread
* Re: New branch for No Gnus
2012-01-31 22:59 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
@ 2012-01-31 23:05 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
2012-01-31 23:26 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
0 siblings, 1 reply; 60+ messages in thread
From: Lars Ingebrigtsen @ 2012-01-31 23:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ding
Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org> writes:
> And now I'll try to merge a real change made in No Gnus...
And I think it went without a hitch! :-)
http://git.gnus.org/cgit/gnus.git/log/
Well, I hope so, at least.
Anyway, thanks for all the help, everybody...
--
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no * Sent from my Rome
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 60+ messages in thread
* Re: New branch for No Gnus
2012-01-31 23:05 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
@ 2012-01-31 23:26 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
2012-01-31 23:32 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
0 siblings, 1 reply; 60+ messages in thread
From: Lars Ingebrigtsen @ 2012-01-31 23:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ding
What happened!
Subject: [gnus git] branch no-gnus updated: m0-1-12-g7c576ff =11= Merge
remote-tracking branch 'origin/no-gnus' ; Merge remote-tracking branch
'origin/no-gnus' ; Start the Ma Gnus news file off. ; (etc)
Two minutes ago? I didn't do anything two minutes ago.
And now all the Ma Gnus stuff is in No Gnus? WTF?
--
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no * Sent from my Rome
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 60+ messages in thread
* Re: New branch for No Gnus
2012-01-31 23:26 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
@ 2012-01-31 23:32 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
2012-01-31 23:37 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
0 siblings, 1 reply; 60+ messages in thread
From: Lars Ingebrigtsen @ 2012-01-31 23:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ding
An now this just happened:
Subject: [gnus git] branch ma-gnus created: m0-1-12-g7c576ff =0=
Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2012 00:29:00 +0100 (2 minutes, 33 seconds ago)
The "From" address points to me, but I don't think I'm doing anything.
Is somebody er doing something?
--
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no * Sent from my Rome
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 60+ messages in thread
* Re: New branch for No Gnus
2012-01-31 23:32 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
@ 2012-01-31 23:37 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
2012-01-31 23:58 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
0 siblings, 1 reply; 60+ messages in thread
From: Lars Ingebrigtsen @ 2012-01-31 23:37 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ding
Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org> writes:
> The "From" address points to me, but I don't think I'm doing anything.
> Is somebody er doing something?
Somebody must be doing something. Two branches, "master" and "ma-gnus"
were just created in the repository.
--
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no * Sent from my Rome
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 60+ messages in thread
* Re: New branch for No Gnus
2012-01-31 23:37 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
@ 2012-01-31 23:58 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
2012-02-01 0:46 ` Andreas Schwab
0 siblings, 1 reply; 60+ messages in thread
From: Lars Ingebrigtsen @ 2012-01-31 23:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ding
So does anybody know how to make git spit who created a branch? I sure
can't, after googling for half an hour.
--
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no * Sent from my Rome
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 60+ messages in thread
* Re: New branch for No Gnus
2012-01-31 23:58 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
@ 2012-02-01 0:46 ` Andreas Schwab
2012-02-01 1:14 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
0 siblings, 1 reply; 60+ messages in thread
From: Andreas Schwab @ 2012-02-01 0:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ding
Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org> writes:
> So does anybody know how to make git spit who created a branch? I sure
> can't, after googling for half an hour.
You can only find that out from the server log, to see who ran the push.
To undo the damange, you can do "git revert -m 2 HEAD" on the no-gnus
branch.
Andreas.
--
Andreas Schwab, schwab@linux-m68k.org
GPG Key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756 01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5
"And now for something completely different."
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 60+ messages in thread
* Re: New branch for No Gnus
2012-02-01 0:46 ` Andreas Schwab
@ 2012-02-01 1:14 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
2012-02-01 1:16 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
0 siblings, 1 reply; 60+ messages in thread
From: Lars Ingebrigtsen @ 2012-02-01 1:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andreas Schwab; +Cc: ding
Andreas Schwab <schwab@linux-m68k.org> writes:
> To undo the damange, you can do "git revert -m 2 HEAD" on the no-gnus
> branch.
Great! I'll do that...
--
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no * Sent from my Rome
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 60+ messages in thread
* Re: New branch for No Gnus
2012-02-01 1:14 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
@ 2012-02-01 1:16 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
2012-02-01 9:10 ` Steinar Bang
2012-02-01 11:31 ` Andreas Schwab
0 siblings, 2 replies; 60+ messages in thread
From: Lars Ingebrigtsen @ 2012-02-01 1:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andreas Schwab; +Cc: ding
Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org> writes:
>> To undo the damange, you can do "git revert -m 2 HEAD" on the no-gnus
>> branch.
>
> Great! I'll do that...
Just to be totally sure I'm not screwing anything up: Should I do a
"git pull" in my local No Gnus tree before saying "git revert -m 2
HEAD", and then pushing out, or should I just do the revert without
pulling from git.gnus.org first?
--
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no * Sent from my Rome
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 60+ messages in thread
* Re: New branch for No Gnus
2012-02-01 1:16 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
@ 2012-02-01 9:10 ` Steinar Bang
2012-02-01 13:19 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
2012-02-01 11:31 ` Andreas Schwab
1 sibling, 1 reply; 60+ messages in thread
From: Steinar Bang @ 2012-02-01 9:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ding
>>>>> Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org>:
> Just to be totally sure I'm not screwing anything up: Should I do a
> "git pull" in my local No Gnus tree before saying "git revert -m 2
> HEAD", and then pushing out, or should I just do the revert without
> pulling from git.gnus.org first?
I assume that this is the fix to the messup that was mentioned earlier
in the thread?
I've never used git-revert myself, but I would have done it this way:
git checkout no-gnus
git revert -m 2 HEAD
git push -f origin HEAD
I could try to explain the logic behind this...? Or I could just mention
chapter 3 of "Pro Git" again...:-)
Briefly:
- if you do "git branch" you will see all local branches in your git
repository.
- If you do "git branch -a" you will see more branches, some with
"remotes/origin/" in front of them.
- All local branches exist only in your local .git directory (they do
not exist upstream (though for tracking branches (mentioned later)
that is a question of semantics...))
- You can only check out and work on a local branch
- Some local branches have a special relationship with a remote
branch. These local branches are called "tracking branches". In
your case, no-gnus and master are tracking branches
- When you work on "no-gnus", you can't update
"remotes/origin/no-gnus" to have the same commits, in other way than
pushing the commits on "no-gnus" to origin. So what I did over, was
to:
- check out the local tracking branch no-gnus
- revert the last two commits on that branch
- push the current state of the branch to no-gnus on the remote
called "origin", updating the "remotes/origin/no-gnus" branch in
your local .git directory in the process
- the "-f" ("force") flag to push is necessary to make it drop
commits already on the branch in the origin remote
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 60+ messages in thread
* Re: New branch for No Gnus
2012-02-01 1:16 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
2012-02-01 9:10 ` Steinar Bang
@ 2012-02-01 11:31 ` Andreas Schwab
2012-02-01 13:03 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
1 sibling, 1 reply; 60+ messages in thread
From: Andreas Schwab @ 2012-02-01 11:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Lars Ingebrigtsen; +Cc: ding
Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org> writes:
> Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org> writes:
>
>>> To undo the damange, you can do "git revert -m 2 HEAD" on the no-gnus
>>> branch.
>>
>> Great! I'll do that...
>
> Just to be totally sure I'm not screwing anything up: Should I do a
> "git pull" in my local No Gnus tree before saying "git revert -m 2
> HEAD", and then pushing out, or should I just do the revert without
> pulling from git.gnus.org first?
You always need to pull first, since the server will not allow
non-fast-forward pushes.
Andreas.
--
Andreas Schwab, schwab@linux-m68k.org
GPG Key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756 01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5
"And now for something completely different."
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 60+ messages in thread
* Re: New branch for No Gnus
2012-01-31 17:02 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
2012-01-31 17:07 ` Richard Riley
2012-01-31 18:36 ` Raphael Kubo da Costa
@ 2012-01-31 20:56 ` Steinar Bang
2012-02-01 16:22 ` Eric S Fraga
2012-02-01 1:47 ` Michael Welsh Duggan
3 siblings, 1 reply; 60+ messages in thread
From: Steinar Bang @ 2012-01-31 20:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ding
>>>>> Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org>:
> But I guess I don't really want to merge No Gnus as is into master. I
> just want to cherry-pick any commits I make, I guess?
Merges are always better than cherry picks: with merges the commits gets
their original identity and commit time. You also get a clear ancestry
for the file, and the commits in the file.
> I certainly don't want to merge the commit I just did that bumped the
> version number to No Gnus 0.20, for instance.
What you can do, is always merge with
cd ~/git/mgnus/
git fetch
git merge --no-ff --no-commit orgin/no-gnus
The "--no-ff" means that the merge will always create a merge commit in
the branch you're merging into. History-wise that's a good thing.
The "--no-commit" tells git merge not to do an auto-commit, but stop,
like it always does of there is a commit.
If you then do `M-x magit-status RET' in cd ~/git/mgnus/ you will see
all files affected by the merge. And entering the files and doing
`C-x v =' will show the diffs with the current branch.
If you don't want the changes for a particular file at all, eg. you want
to keep the current version of the lisp/silly.el file, do
git checkout origin/master lisp/silly.el
If you do a `g' in the "magit: mgnus" buffer, you will see that
lisp/silly.el has gone away.
If you get a conflict: enter the file, look at the conflict markers and
edit the file to your satisfaction, and then stage the file.
Once you're satisfied with the merge results, just press `c' in the
"magit: mgnus" buffer, og do
git commit
at the command line, whatever suits you best.
The best thing about this, is that if the files you don't want merged
doesn't have any changes on the no-gnus branch, you won't be bothered by
them on the next merge. As far as git is concerned it has already been
merged with the master branch, and the current version on master (which
was the old version on master) is the result.
> So how do I cherry-pick commits?
git cherry-pick sha1-of-commit
But like I said earlier: if you can do it with regular merges, that's
much to be preferred.
(it's chapter 3 in that book again...)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 60+ messages in thread
* Re: New branch for No Gnus
2012-01-31 20:56 ` Steinar Bang
@ 2012-02-01 16:22 ` Eric S Fraga
0 siblings, 0 replies; 60+ messages in thread
From: Eric S Fraga @ 2012-02-01 16:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ding
Steinar Bang <sb@dod.no> writes:
> What you can do, is always merge with
> cd ~/git/mgnus/
> git fetch
> git merge --no-ff --no-commit orgin/no-gnus
[...] very useful stuff omitted
Just to say that this was the most helpful yet concise explanation on
how to merge branches in git that I have run into. One email that I
will keep for posterity.
Thank you!
--
: Eric S Fraga (GnuPG: 0xC89193D8FFFCF67D) in Emacs 24.0.92.1 + Ma Gnus v0.2
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 60+ messages in thread
* Re: New branch for No Gnus
2012-01-31 17:02 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2012-01-31 20:56 ` Steinar Bang
@ 2012-02-01 1:47 ` Michael Welsh Duggan
3 siblings, 0 replies; 60+ messages in thread
From: Michael Welsh Duggan @ 2012-02-01 1:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ding
Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org> writes:
> Ok, the new No Gnus branch has been created, and Ma Gnus has been
> started. Let's see whether I can actually do merges now, then. :-)
Hmm... The no-gnus branch includes the following Changelog message:
2012-01-31 Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org>
* gnus.el (gnus-version): Change name to "Ma Gnus".
Which is a little confusing.
--
Michael Welsh Duggan
(md5i@md5i.com)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 60+ messages in thread