On 17/08/12 00:35, Pete Wyckoff wrote:
These patches rework how git p4 deals with conflicts that
arise during a "git p4 submit". These may arise due to
changes that happened in p4 since the last "git p4 sync".
Luke: I especially wanted to get this out as you suggested
that you had a different way of dealing with skipped commits.
The part that needs the most attention is the interaction
loop that happens when a commit failed. Currently, three
options are offered:
[s]kip this commit, but continue to apply others
[a]pply the commit forcefully, generating .rej files
[w]rite the commit to a patch.txt file
and the implicit<ctrl-c> to stop
After this series, it offers two:
[c]ontinue to apply others
[q]uit to stop
This feels more natural to me, and I like the term "continue" rather
than "skip" as it matches what rebase uses. I'd like to know what
others think of the new flow.
The skip is still needed. In my workflow, git-p4 gets run periodically
and does the usual sync+rebase on behalf of all the people who have
pushed to the git repo.
If someone pushes a change which conflicts with something from Perforce
land, then what I want to happen is for the script to discard the
offending commit (git rebase --skip) and then carry on with the others.
In 99% of cases this does exactly what I need, as conflicting commits
are usually caused by people committing the same fix to both p4 and git
at around the same time (someone breaks top-of-tree with an obvious
error, two separate people check in slightly different fixes).
Discarding the git commit then means that everything carries on working.
I've got a small patch which makes skipping work non-interactively; the
thing it's missing is reporting the commits which are skipped.
Other observable changes are new command-line options:
Alias -v for --verbose, similar to other git commands.
The --dry-run option addresses Luke's concern in
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/201004/focus=201022
when I removed an unused "self.interactive" variable
that did a similar thing if you edited the code. It prints
commits that would be applied to p4.
Option --prepare-p4-only is similar to --dry-run, in that
it does not submit anything to p4, but it does prepare the
p4 workspace, then prints long instructions about how to submit
everything properly. It also serves, perhaps, as a replacement for
the [a]pply option in the submit-conflict loop.
Pete Wyckoff (12):
git p4 test: remove bash-ism of combined export/assignment
git p4 test: use p4d -L option to suppress log messages
git p4: gracefully fail if some commits could not be applied
git p4: remove submit failure options [a]pply and [w]rite
git p4: move conflict prompt into run, use [c]ontinue and [q]uit
git p4: standardize submit cancel due to unchanged template
git p4: test clean-up after failed submit, fix added files
git p4: rearrange submit template construction
git p4: revert deleted files after submit cancel
git p4: accept -v for --verbose
git p4: add submit --dry-run option
git p4: add submit --prepare-p4-only option
Documentation/git-p4.txt | 13 +-
git-p4.py | 213 +++++++++++++++------
t/lib-git-p4.sh | 10 +-
t/t9805-git-p4-skip-submit-edit.sh | 2 +-
t/t9807-git-p4-submit.sh | 65 +++++++
t/t9810-git-p4-rcs.sh | 50 +----
t/t9815-git-p4-submit-fail.sh | 367 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
7 files changed, 612 insertions(+), 108 deletions(-)
create mode 100755 t/t9815-git-p4-submit-fail.sh
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
