RetroSearch Browse

Sun Mar 6 21:57:39 CET 2011 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2011-March/108844.html

Am 06.03.2011 21:46, schrieb skip at pobox.com:
>
>      Antoine>  Yes, there is. You can simply push to your 3.2 repo instead:
>
>      Antoine>  $ cd 3.1
>      Antoine>  $ hg up 3.1    # just in case
>      Antoine>   # hack, compile, test
>      Antoine>  $ hg ci -m "Issue #xxx: nasty bug now fixed"
>      Antoine>  $ hg push ../3.2
>      Antoine>  $ cd ../3.2
>      Antoine>  $ hg up 3.2    # just in case
>      Antoine>  $ hg merge 3.1
>      Antoine>   # compile, test, optionally resolve conflicts
>      Antoine>  $ hg ci -m "Merge fix for issue #xxx"
>
> Thanks.  I don't understand what the "hg merge 3.1" does.  You already
> pushed from 3.1 to ../3.2 then updated in 3.2.  Didn't that make the changes
> available?

"Included", but not "available". The changes are in your "3.2 clone", 
but not in the "3.2 branch" of the "3.2 clone". Each clone has all 
branches, even if you only "update" to one of them.

So after "hg push", the change is on the "3.1 branch" of the "3.2
clone". The "merge 3.1" tries to merge all changes on the 3.1 branch
that are not already on the 3.2 branch to the 3.2 branch.

HTH,
Martin

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2011-March/108844.html below:

[Python-Dev] CPython hg transition complete