[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: bzr repository ready?
From: |
Stephen J. Turnbull |
Subject: |
Re: bzr repository ready? |
Date: |
Mon, 23 Nov 2009 14:58:02 +0900 |
Karl Fogel writes:
> So just to make sure, when you wrote in the wiki
I've reviewed your changes to the wiki entry and they are absolutely
correct.
> "You can also just push it directly to the upstream master:
> bzr push bzr+ssh://bzr.savannah.gnu.org/sources/emacs/trunk/"
>
> you were talking about running that from within branch SOME-TASKNAME,
> *not* from within the local trunk mirror, right?
Yes.
> (It might be good to always wrap commands in 'cd foo; ...; cd ..' so the
> reader is absolutely clear on what's taking place where.)
Hey, by the time I finished that entry it was 4 am.... I think I done
purty good.<wink> But yes, your convention makes a lot of sense (note
that I did get it right in my workflow response to somebody, later).
> "On the other hand, if you push directly from the ##SOME-TASKNAME##
> branch, your branch will be perceived as part of the mainline by
> ##bzr log##, while commits on the mainline (including merges from
> other developers and their detailed branch histories) will be hidden."
>
> I don't understand the second part. How will commits on the mainline be
> hidden? (That is, from whom will they be hidden, and in what
> situations?)
They will be hidden from "bzr log -n1" on the master repository, when
they are brought in to SOME-TASKNAME via merges from the master
(upstream) or trunk (local mirror). The reason is that when you merge
into SOME-TASKNAME from one of those, the commit from SOME-TASKNAME is
the *left parent* of the merge commit. When you push that merge
commit to master, it will become the tip *as is*, and thus all work
committed to the master since SOME-TASKNAME branched will be on
rightward branches, and will be summarized as merges into SOME-TASKNAME.
> It might be better just to recommend the merge-and-commit workflow for
> *everything*, always, and let those who want to become Bzr Jedi Masters
> learn to do the "just push" on their own, when they are experienced
> enough to understand the consequences. Thoughts?
I agree about the recommendation, but think description of the effects
should be moved to a separate page (or an explanatory section if
there's a possibility that this page might move to bazaar-vcs). It's
too easy to discover for yourself, so I would write something like
It might occur to you to save some effort by doing "bzr push" from
the SOME-TASKNAME branch. *Do not do this*: it `results in a
different history`__ in the upstream master.
__BzrLogTreatsLeftmostParentsDifferentlyFromRightwardParents
(markup is reStructuredText). The linked page would contain the full
explanation.
- Re: bzr repository ready?, (continued)
- Re: bzr repository ready?, Karl Fogel, 2009/11/20
- Re: bzr repository ready?, Lennart Borgman, 2009/11/20
- Re: bzr repository ready?, Óscar Fuentes, 2009/11/20
- Re: bzr repository ready?, Lennart Borgman, 2009/11/20
- Re: bzr repository ready?, Óscar Fuentes, 2009/11/20
- Re: bzr repository ready?, Stefan Monnier, 2009/11/21
- Re: bzr repository ready?, Óscar Fuentes, 2009/11/21
- Re: bzr repository ready?, Karl Fogel, 2009/11/21
- Re: bzr repository ready?, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2009/11/21
- Re: bzr repository ready?, Karl Fogel, 2009/11/22
- Re: bzr repository ready?,
Stephen J. Turnbull <=
- Re: bzr repository ready?, Karl Fogel, 2009/11/23
- Re: bzr repository ready?, Karl Fogel, 2009/11/23
- Re: bzr repository ready?, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2009/11/23
- Re: bzr repository ready?, Karl Fogel, 2009/11/23
- Re: bzr repository ready?, Karl Fogel, 2009/11/29
- Re: bzr repository ready?, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2009/11/30
- Re: bzr repository ready?, Karl Fogel, 2009/11/30
- Re: bzr repository ready?, Eli Zaretskii, 2009/11/21
- Re: bzr repository ready?, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2009/11/21
- Re: bzr repository ready?, Óscar Fuentes, 2009/11/21