[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Monotone-devel] New branch name with no other changes
From: |
Hendrik Boom |
Subject: |
Re: [Monotone-devel] New branch name with no other changes |
Date: |
Sun, 12 Jun 2011 15:44:12 -0400 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) |
On Sun, Jun 12, 2011 at 04:24:35AM -0400, Stephen Leake wrote:
> Richard Levitte <address@hidden> writes:
>
> > In message <address@hidden> on Fri, 10 Jun 2011 16:40:59 +0200, Thomas
> > Keller <address@hidden> said:
> >
> > me> Am 10.06.2011 16:26, schrieb Hendrik Boom:
> > me> > Actually, the approve command worked fine, though it took a few
> > moments
> > me> > to determine the right revision ID. Maybe approving the revision in
> > the
> > me> > current workspace should be an option on that command? I wouldn't
> > want
> > me> > it to be the default: too easy to approve the wrong thing by accident.
> > me>
> > me> You could use
> > me>
> > me> mtn approve -b new.branch w:
> > me>
> > me> for the very same purpose and don't have to figure out the current rev
> > me> id at all.
> >
> > But that places the current revision in the new branch as well. Was
> > that Hendrik's intention, or was the intention that the next revision
> > should end up in the new branch?
>
> He said "it worked fine" :)
>
> > What you'r forgetting, by the way, is that approve will not place the
> > workspace in the new branch, so the next commit after that will end up
> > in the original branch.
>
> That is my process; I always create a new branch by adding a cert to an
> existing revision, then checkout the branch into a new workspace, while
> the current workspace remains on the original branch.
That's exactly what I ended up doing.
>
> I maintain a strict correlation between workspace directory name and
> branch name; I _never_ change the branch in an existing workspace (I
> just find that confusing, and I often want to diff between branches to
> see what has changed).
And that strict correlation sounds like a good policy!
So my real problem was not knowing about the approve command. I may
have heard about it before, but if I did assumed it was for reporting on
the success of testing, rather than providing a branch name.
-- hendrik
- Re: [Monotone-devel] Improving documentation, (continued)
- Re: [Monotone-devel] Improving documentation, Richard Levitte, 2011/06/10
- Re: [Monotone-devel] Improving documentation, Aaron W. Hsu, 2011/06/10
- Re: [Monotone-devel] Improving documentation, Richard Levitte, 2011/06/10
- Re: [Monotone-devel] Improving documentation, Aaron W. Hsu, 2011/06/10
- Re: [Monotone-devel] Improving documentation, Stephen Leake, 2011/06/12
- Re: [Monotone-devel] Improving documentation, Aaron W. Hsu, 2011/06/12
- Re: [Monotone-devel] Improving documentation, Stephen Leake, 2011/06/12
- Re: [Monotone-devel] New branch name with no other changes, Richard Levitte, 2011/06/10
- Re: [Monotone-devel] New branch name with no other changes, CooSoft Support, 2011/06/11
- Re: [Monotone-devel] New branch name with no other changes, Stephen Leake, 2011/06/12
- Re: [Monotone-devel] New branch name with no other changes,
Hendrik Boom <=
- Re: [Monotone-devel] New branch name with no other changes, Stephen Leake, 2011/06/12
- Re: [Monotone-devel] New branch name with no other changes, Nuno Lucas, 2011/06/12
- Re: [Monotone-devel] New branch name with no other changes, Hendrik Boom, 2011/06/13
- Re: [Monotone-devel] New branch name with no other changes, CooSoft Support, 2011/06/16
- Re: [Monotone-devel] New branch name with no other changes, Hendrik Boom, 2011/06/16
- Re: [Monotone-devel] New branch name with no other changes, Richard Levitte, 2011/06/16
- Re: [Monotone-devel] New branch name with no other changes, Hendrik Boom, 2011/06/16
- Re: [Monotone-devel] New branch name with no other changes, Jerome Baum, 2011/06/16
- Re: [Monotone-devel] New branch name with no other changes, Stephen Leake, 2011/06/12
- Re: [Monotone-devel] New branch name with no other changes, CooSoft Support, 2011/06/12