[Emc-developers] Git lost
I am working on 2.8 locally, I have: Pulled from origin Modified some files Committed Tested Switched to 2.8 Pulled from origin Merged 2.8 Now there are commits that I am not sure belong in master I am not sure where to go from here. ___ Emc-developers mailing list Emc-developers@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers
Re: [Emc-developers] Git lost
On Fri, 19 Jul 2019 at 08:01, Phillip Carter wrote: > I am working on 2.8 locally, I have: > Pulled from origin > Modified some files > Committed > Tested > Switched to 2.8 > Pulled from origin > Merged 2.8 > Now there are commits that I am not sure belong in master > Should one of those 2.8s be a "master" ? (You seem to have switched to 2.8 from 2.8 in that sequence) -- atp "A motorcycle is a bicycle with a pandemonium attachment and is designed for the especial use of mechanical geniuses, daredevils and lunatics." — George Fitch, Atlanta Constitution Newspaper, 1916 ___ Emc-developers mailing list Emc-developers@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers
Re: [Emc-developers] Git lost
Oops, yes, after Tested should be Switched to master.Cheers, Phill Original message From: andy pugh Date: 19/7/19 7:27 pm (GMT+10:00) To: EMC developers Subject: Re: [Emc-developers] Git lost On Fri, 19 Jul 2019 at 08:01, Phillip Carter wrote:> I am working on 2.8 locally, I have:> Pulled from origin> Modified some files> Committed> Tested> Switched to 2.8> Pulled from origin> Merged 2.8> Now there are commits that I am not sure belong in master>Should one of those 2.8s be a "master" ?(You seem to have switched to 2.8 from 2.8 in that sequence)-- atp"A motorcycle is a bicycle with a pandemonium attachment and is designedfor the especial use of mechanical geniuses, daredevils and lunatics."— George Fitch, Atlanta Constitution Newspaper, 1916___Emc-developers mailing listEmc-developers@lists.sourceforge.nethttps://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers ___ Emc-developers mailing list Emc-developers@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers
Re: [Emc-developers] Git lost
On Fri, 19 Jul 2019 at 10:54, Phillip Carter wrote: > Oops, yes, after Tested should be Switched to master OK, so you are about to merge some changes that are in 2.8, not in master, and were not made by you. I think that is probably OK. The norm in LinuxCNC is to put changes in the earliest branch they apply to, and then merge them up. The other things you see probably do belong in master, and were just sat there waiting for a merge. Is there anything in the list of commits that looks particularly wrong? -- atp "A motorcycle is a bicycle with a pandemonium attachment and is designed for the especial use of mechanical geniuses, daredevils and lunatics." — George Fitch, Atlanta Constitution Newspaper, 1916 ___ Emc-developers mailing list Emc-developers@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers
Re: [Emc-developers] Git lost
> On 20 Jul 2019, at 12:13 am, andy pugh wrote: > > On Fri, 19 Jul 2019 at 10:54, Phillip Carter > wrote: > >> Oops, yes, after Tested should be Switched to master > > > OK, so you are about to merge some changes that are in 2.8, not in master, > and were not made by you. > Correct > I think that is probably OK. The norm in LinuxCNC is to put changes in the > earliest branch they apply to, and then merge them up. The other things you > see probably do belong in master, and were just sat there waiting for a > merge. > OK, thanks > Is there anything in the list of commits that looks particularly wrong? > Not really but I wasn’t really sure of procedure and I don’t want to do the wrong thing… What happens in the case that something was meant for 2.8 but not for master, how is that prevented from being merged up in the future? > -- > atp > "A motorcycle is a bicycle with a pandemonium attachment and is designed > for the especial use of mechanical geniuses, daredevils and lunatics." > — George Fitch, Atlanta Constitution Newspaper, 1916 > > ___ > Emc-developers mailing list > Emc-developers@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers ___ Emc-developers mailing list Emc-developers@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers
Re: [Emc-developers] Git lost
On Sat, 20 Jul 2019 at 00:35, Phillip Carter wrote: What happens in the case that something was meant for 2.8 but not for > master, how is that prevented from being merged up in the future? That's a very good question. And one to which I wish I had the answer -- atp "A motorcycle is a bicycle with a pandemonium attachment and is designed for the especial use of mechanical geniuses, daredevils and lunatics." — George Fitch, Atlanta Constitution Newspaper, 1916 ___ Emc-developers mailing list Emc-developers@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers
Re: [Emc-developers] Git lost
I too haven't done this exact thing - i have had completely different changes go into release vrs master, so there was a conflict and I could pick the right code - big pain. But look at this, I think it covers your use case: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/727994/git-skipping-specific-commits-when-merging Chris From: Phillip Carter Sent: July 19, 2019 11:33 PM To: linuxcnc-developers Subject: Re: [Emc-developers] Git lost > On 20 Jul 2019, at 12:13 am, andy pugh wrote: > > On Fri, 19 Jul 2019 at 10:54, Phillip Carter > wrote: > >> Oops, yes, after Tested should be Switched to master > > > OK, so you are about to merge some changes that are in 2.8, not in master, > and were not made by you. > Correct > I think that is probably OK. The norm in LinuxCNC is to put changes in the > earliest branch they apply to, and then merge them up. The other things you > see probably do belong in master, and were just sat there waiting for a > merge. > OK, thanks > Is there anything in the list of commits that looks particularly wrong? > Not really but I wasn’t really sure of procedure and I don’t want to do the wrong thing… What happens in the case that something was meant for 2.8 but not for master, how is that prevented from being merged up in the future? > -- > atp > "A motorcycle is a bicycle with a pandemonium attachment and is designed > for the especial use of mechanical geniuses, daredevils and lunatics." > — George Fitch, Atlanta Constitution Newspaper, 1916 > > ___ > Emc-developers mailing list > Emc-developers@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers ___ Emc-developers mailing list Emc-developers@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers ___ Emc-developers mailing list Emc-developers@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers
Re: [Emc-developers] Git lost
Sorry, I don’t want to actually do this. I was just asking the question because I saw all those commits and I wasn’t sure what to do. I really don’t want to break anything... > On 20 Jul 2019, at 9:55 am, Chris Morley wrote: > > I too haven't done this exact thing - i have had completely different changes > go into release vrs master, so there was a conflict and I could pick the > right code - big pain. > But look at this, I think it covers your use case: > https://stackoverflow.com/questions/727994/git-skipping-specific-commits-when-merging > > Chris > > > From: Phillip Carter > Sent: July 19, 2019 11:33 PM > To: linuxcnc-developers > Subject: Re: [Emc-developers] Git lost > > > >> On 20 Jul 2019, at 12:13 am, andy pugh wrote: >> >> On Fri, 19 Jul 2019 at 10:54, Phillip Carter >> wrote: >> >>> Oops, yes, after Tested should be Switched to master >> >> >> OK, so you are about to merge some changes that are in 2.8, not in master, >> and were not made by you. >> > > Correct > >> I think that is probably OK. The norm in LinuxCNC is to put changes in the >> earliest branch they apply to, and then merge them up. The other things you >> see probably do belong in master, and were just sat there waiting for a >> merge. >> > > OK, thanks > >> Is there anything in the list of commits that looks particularly wrong? >> > > Not really but I wasn’t really sure of procedure and I don’t want to do the > wrong thing… > > What happens in the case that something was meant for 2.8 but not for master, > how is that prevented from being merged up in the future? > >> -- >> atp >> "A motorcycle is a bicycle with a pandemonium attachment and is designed >> for the especial use of mechanical geniuses, daredevils and lunatics." >> — George Fitch, Atlanta Constitution Newspaper, 1916 >> >> ___ >> Emc-developers mailing list >> Emc-developers@lists.sourceforge.net >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers > > > > ___ > Emc-developers mailing list > Emc-developers@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers > > ___ > Emc-developers mailing list > Emc-developers@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers ___ Emc-developers mailing list Emc-developers@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers
Re: [Emc-developers] Git lost
So you were wanting to merge just your work and leave the other stuff to be merged later? That would be a nice feature - cherry-pick kinda does this but IIRC it can complicate merges later.. Now you can see why it's nice when a committer merges things right away so they can deal with their own code. Chris From: Phillip Carter Sent: July 20, 2019 12:02 AM To: linuxcnc-developers Subject: Re: [Emc-developers] Git lost Sorry, I don’t want to actually do this. I was just asking the question because I saw all those commits and I wasn’t sure what to do. I really don’t want to break anything... > On 20 Jul 2019, at 9:55 am, Chris Morley wrote: > > I too haven't done this exact thing - i have had completely different changes > go into release vrs master, so there was a conflict and I could pick the > right code - big pain. > But look at this, I think it covers your use case: > https://stackoverflow.com/questions/727994/git-skipping-specific-commits-when-merging > > Chris > > > From: Phillip Carter > Sent: July 19, 2019 11:33 PM > To: linuxcnc-developers > Subject: Re: [Emc-developers] Git lost > > > >> On 20 Jul 2019, at 12:13 am, andy pugh wrote: >> >> On Fri, 19 Jul 2019 at 10:54, Phillip Carter >> wrote: >> >>> Oops, yes, after Tested should be Switched to master >> >> >> OK, so you are about to merge some changes that are in 2.8, not in master, >> and were not made by you. >> > > Correct > >> I think that is probably OK. The norm in LinuxCNC is to put changes in the >> earliest branch they apply to, and then merge them up. The other things you >> see probably do belong in master, and were just sat there waiting for a >> merge. >> > > OK, thanks > >> Is there anything in the list of commits that looks particularly wrong? >> > > Not really but I wasn’t really sure of procedure and I don’t want to do the > wrong thing… > > What happens in the case that something was meant for 2.8 but not for master, > how is that prevented from being merged up in the future? > >> -- >> atp >> "A motorcycle is a bicycle with a pandemonium attachment and is designed >> for the especial use of mechanical geniuses, daredevils and lunatics." >> — George Fitch, Atlanta Constitution Newspaper, 1916 >> >> ___ >> Emc-developers mailing list >> Emc-developers@lists.sourceforge.net >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers > > > > ___ > Emc-developers mailing list > Emc-developers@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers > > ___ > Emc-developers mailing list > Emc-developers@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers ___ Emc-developers mailing list Emc-developers@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers ___ Emc-developers mailing list Emc-developers@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers
Re: [Emc-developers] Git lost
Yep, it scared the heck out of me... > On 20 Jul 2019, at 10:17 am, Chris Morley wrote: > > So you were wanting to merge just your work and leave the other stuff to be > merged later? > That would be a nice feature - cherry-pick kinda does this but IIRC it can > complicate merges later.. > > Now you can see why it's nice when a committer merges things right away so > they can deal with their own code. > > Chris > > > From: Phillip Carter > Sent: July 20, 2019 12:02 AM > To: linuxcnc-developers > Subject: Re: [Emc-developers] Git lost > > Sorry, I don’t want to actually do this. > > I was just asking the question because I saw all those commits and I wasn’t > sure what to do. > > I really don’t want to break anything... > >> On 20 Jul 2019, at 9:55 am, Chris Morley wrote: >> >> I too haven't done this exact thing - i have had completely different >> changes go into release vrs master, so there was a conflict and I could pick >> the right code - big pain. >> But look at this, I think it covers your use case: >> https://stackoverflow.com/questions/727994/git-skipping-specific-commits-when-merging >> >> Chris >> >> ____ >> From: Phillip Carter >> Sent: July 19, 2019 11:33 PM >> To: linuxcnc-developers >> Subject: Re: [Emc-developers] Git lost >> >> >> >>> On 20 Jul 2019, at 12:13 am, andy pugh wrote: >>> >>> On Fri, 19 Jul 2019 at 10:54, Phillip Carter >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Oops, yes, after Tested should be Switched to master >>> >>> >>> OK, so you are about to merge some changes that are in 2.8, not in master, >>> and were not made by you. >>> >> >> Correct >> >>> I think that is probably OK. The norm in LinuxCNC is to put changes in the >>> earliest branch they apply to, and then merge them up. The other things you >>> see probably do belong in master, and were just sat there waiting for a >>> merge. >>> >> >> OK, thanks >> >>> Is there anything in the list of commits that looks particularly wrong? >>> >> >> Not really but I wasn’t really sure of procedure and I don’t want to do the >> wrong thing… >> >> What happens in the case that something was meant for 2.8 but not for >> master, how is that prevented from being merged up in the future? >> >>> -- >>> atp >>> "A motorcycle is a bicycle with a pandemonium attachment and is designed >>> for the especial use of mechanical geniuses, daredevils and lunatics." >>> — George Fitch, Atlanta Constitution Newspaper, 1916 >>> >>> ___ >>> Emc-developers mailing list >>> Emc-developers@lists.sourceforge.net >>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers >> >> >> >> ___ >> Emc-developers mailing list >> Emc-developers@lists.sourceforge.net >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers >> >> ___ >> Emc-developers mailing list >> Emc-developers@lists.sourceforge.net >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers > > > > ___ > Emc-developers mailing list > Emc-developers@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers > > ___ > Emc-developers mailing list > Emc-developers@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers ___ Emc-developers mailing list Emc-developers@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers
Re: [Emc-developers] Git lost
If it's just Roberts's stuff in 2.8 you are worried about - it seems to merge cleanly to master - go for it. Chris From: Phillip Carter Sent: July 20, 2019 12:02 AM To: linuxcnc-developers Subject: Re: [Emc-developers] Git lost Sorry, I don’t want to actually do this. I was just asking the question because I saw all those commits and I wasn’t sure what to do. I really don’t want to break anything... > On 20 Jul 2019, at 9:55 am, Chris Morley wrote: > > I too haven't done this exact thing - i have had completely different changes > go into release vrs master, so there was a conflict and I could pick the > right code - big pain. > But look at this, I think it covers your use case: > https://stackoverflow.com/questions/727994/git-skipping-specific-commits-when-merging > > Chris > > > From: Phillip Carter > Sent: July 19, 2019 11:33 PM > To: linuxcnc-developers > Subject: Re: [Emc-developers] Git lost > > > >> On 20 Jul 2019, at 12:13 am, andy pugh wrote: >> >> On Fri, 19 Jul 2019 at 10:54, Phillip Carter >> wrote: >> >>> Oops, yes, after Tested should be Switched to master >> >> >> OK, so you are about to merge some changes that are in 2.8, not in master, >> and were not made by you. >> > > Correct > >> I think that is probably OK. The norm in LinuxCNC is to put changes in the >> earliest branch they apply to, and then merge them up. The other things you >> see probably do belong in master, and were just sat there waiting for a >> merge. >> > > OK, thanks > >> Is there anything in the list of commits that looks particularly wrong? >> > > Not really but I wasn’t really sure of procedure and I don’t want to do the > wrong thing… > > What happens in the case that something was meant for 2.8 but not for master, > how is that prevented from being merged up in the future? > >> -- >> atp >> "A motorcycle is a bicycle with a pandemonium attachment and is designed >> for the especial use of mechanical geniuses, daredevils and lunatics." >> — George Fitch, Atlanta Constitution Newspaper, 1916 >> >> ___ >> Emc-developers mailing list >> Emc-developers@lists.sourceforge.net >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers > > > > ___ > Emc-developers mailing list > Emc-developers@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers > > ___ > Emc-developers mailing list > Emc-developers@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers ___ Emc-developers mailing list Emc-developers@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers ___ Emc-developers mailing list Emc-developers@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers
Re: [Emc-developers] Git lost
Yes, that was it, thanks. > On 20 Jul 2019, at 10:23 am, Chris Morley wrote: > > If it's just Roberts's stuff in 2.8 you are worried about - it seems to merge > cleanly to master - go for it. > > Chris > > > From: Phillip Carter > Sent: July 20, 2019 12:02 AM > To: linuxcnc-developers > Subject: Re: [Emc-developers] Git lost > > Sorry, I don’t want to actually do this. > > I was just asking the question because I saw all those commits and I wasn’t > sure what to do. > > I really don’t want to break anything... > >> On 20 Jul 2019, at 9:55 am, Chris Morley wrote: >> >> I too haven't done this exact thing - i have had completely different >> changes go into release vrs master, so there was a conflict and I could pick >> the right code - big pain. >> But look at this, I think it covers your use case: >> https://stackoverflow.com/questions/727994/git-skipping-specific-commits-when-merging >> >> Chris >> >> ________ >> From: Phillip Carter >> Sent: July 19, 2019 11:33 PM >> To: linuxcnc-developers >> Subject: Re: [Emc-developers] Git lost >> >> >> >>> On 20 Jul 2019, at 12:13 am, andy pugh wrote: >>> >>> On Fri, 19 Jul 2019 at 10:54, Phillip Carter >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Oops, yes, after Tested should be Switched to master >>> >>> >>> OK, so you are about to merge some changes that are in 2.8, not in master, >>> and were not made by you. >>> >> >> Correct >> >>> I think that is probably OK. The norm in LinuxCNC is to put changes in the >>> earliest branch they apply to, and then merge them up. The other things you >>> see probably do belong in master, and were just sat there waiting for a >>> merge. >>> >> >> OK, thanks >> >>> Is there anything in the list of commits that looks particularly wrong? >>> >> >> Not really but I wasn’t really sure of procedure and I don’t want to do the >> wrong thing… >> >> What happens in the case that something was meant for 2.8 but not for >> master, how is that prevented from being merged up in the future? >> >>> -- >>> atp >>> "A motorcycle is a bicycle with a pandemonium attachment and is designed >>> for the especial use of mechanical geniuses, daredevils and lunatics." >>> — George Fitch, Atlanta Constitution Newspaper, 1916 >>> >>> ___ >>> Emc-developers mailing list >>> Emc-developers@lists.sourceforge.net >>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers >> >> >> >> ___ >> Emc-developers mailing list >> Emc-developers@lists.sourceforge.net >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers >> >> ___ >> Emc-developers mailing list >> Emc-developers@lists.sourceforge.net >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers > > > > ___ > Emc-developers mailing list > Emc-developers@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers > > ___ > Emc-developers mailing list > Emc-developers@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers ___ Emc-developers mailing list Emc-developers@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers
