Re: new branch?

[Jaroslav Hajek]

On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 4:43 PM, Ben Abbott <address@hidden> wrote:
>
> On Jun 3, 2009, at 10:32 AM, Ben Abbott wrote:
>
>> On Jun 3, 2009, at 10:19 AM, Jaroslav Hajek wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 4:13 PM, Ben Abbott <address@hidden> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Jun 3, 2009, at 10:09 AM, Jaroslav Hajek wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 3:58 PM, Ben Abbott <address@hidden> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> John / Jaroslav,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I see an unexpected branch in the sources at rev 9284. The branch is
>>>>>> more
>>>>>> like a stub as it only contains two changesets. Both of them are mine.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Revision: 9285
>>>>>> Branch: default
>>>>>> Author: Ben Abbott <address@hidden>  2009-05-29 21:46:43
>>>>>> Committer: Ben Abbott <address@hidden>  2009-05-29 21:46:43
>>>>>> Parent: 9284:d8becc6d0a18 (__scatter__.m: If the color spec is empty,
>>>>>> set
>>>>>> using __next_line_color__.)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  __gnuplot_has_feature__.m: Change version for "x11_figure_position"
>>>>>> from
>>>>>> ">=4.3.0" to ">=4.2.5".
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Revision: 9284
>>>>>> Branch: default
>>>>>> Author: Ben Abbott <address@hidden>  2009-05-29 20:46:34
>>>>>> Committer: Ben Abbott <address@hidden>  2009-05-29 20:46:34
>>>>>> Parent: 9283:38ad8c99d6a2 (__gnuplot_get_var__.m: insert missing
>>>>>> semicolon)
>>>>>> Child:  9285:692c5a6ab019 (__gnuplot_has_feature__.m: Change version
>>>>>> for
>>>>>> "x11_figure_position" from ">=4.3.0" to ">=4.2.5".)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  __scatter__.m: If the color spec is empty, set using
>>>>>> __next_line_color__.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm not very good with mercurial, and am only came across the problem
>>>>>> when I
>>>>>> did "hg view".
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Do you see these changesets in your archive?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ben
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> No, I think neither of these is present, at least the IDs can't be
>>>>> found. Probably you pulled and forgot to merge or rebase (rebasing is
>>>>> preferred).
>>>>>
>>>>> regards
>>>>
>>>> Ok. Thanks. I'll try to fix my end tomorrow and then push these changes.
>>>>
>>>> Ben
>>>
>>> Are they worth getting into 3.2.0? I've set up Friday as the release
>>> day, and I want to avoid further delay if possible,
>>> but there's still time to make rc8 tomorrow. However, if you think
>>> they deserve testing, we better keep them for 3.2.1.
>>>
>>> cheers
>>
>> These are both trivial changes. I doubt they'd cause any problems, so I'd
>> recommend they be included.
>>
>> I'll push them as soon as I can and you can judge what is appropriate.
>>
>> Ben
>
> ok, I cheated and deleted my primary archive, pulled a fresh copy, recreated
> the changesets and pushed.
>
> Ben
>

Oh dear. Not that I never did it :) But next time, try "hg rebase". Or
qimport & qpop the changesets, then qpush them onto the proper head.

regards


-- 
RNDr. Jaroslav Hajek
computing expert & GNU Octave developer
Aeronautical Research and Test Institute (VZLU)
Prague, Czech Republic
url: www.highegg.matfyz.cz