[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: bzr repository ready?
From: |
Karl Fogel |
Subject: |
Re: bzr repository ready? |
Date: |
Mon, 23 Nov 2009 00:41:53 -0600 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.1.50 (gnu/linux) |
"Stephen J. Turnbull" <address@hidden> writes:
> Hey, by the time I finished that entry it was 4 am.... I think I done
> purty good.<wink>
You did, you did! <pat> <pat> :-)
> > 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.
Whooo... okay, I see, right. So, how shall we summarize that in a
parenthetical aside?
(Rhetorical question. I agree with your suggestion below that we're
better off just recommending against that workflow.)
> > 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.
I completely agree. We might even find a place in the existing generic
Bazaar documentation we can point to, for some of these effects.
It's late in Chicago now and I won't have a chance to make this edit
before I sleep. If you get a chance, please go ahead and do it;
otherwise I'll try to update the doc later.
-Karl
- Re: bzr repository ready?, (continued)
- 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, 2009/11/23
- Re: bzr repository ready?,
Karl Fogel <=
- 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
- Re: bzr repository ready?, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2009/11/21