Re: [fossil-users] import of ancient projects
Hi, I'm now at the stage where everything is imported properly and ended up trying to merge A2 and B2 which resulted in 7 merge conflicts, I'm not sure how to display them (possibly via web ui) or even better how to replace that merge with another file, basically ending up with desired fake merge. thanks, Marek Original Message From：Ron Wilson ronw.m...@gmail.com Time：3/28/2012 19:12 To：Fossil SCM user's discussion fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org Subject：Re: [fossil-users] import of ancient projects On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 12:54 PM, mlfconv mlf.c...@gmail.com wrote: basically i don't want Fossil to perform a merge of A2 and B2 (A is the master branch) but insert another file which only acts as a merge and is tagged or labeled as merge but no actual merge is performed by Fossil, A3 is only inserted instead of merging (A3 actually is a file that merged two distinct features from A2 and B2 which is why I want to keep it as historical record instead of doing an actual merge, also B2 evolved into B3 after merge into A3. As long as you don't mind that the revision graph will not show any indication of a merge, you can just commit A3 as is. If you do want the graph to show a merge, you can do a fossil merge, then replace the result with your A3 before commiting. (As I mentioned, fossil merge does not automatically commit the result of a merge. In your case, it would merge changes from B into your working copy of A2, leaving the resulting files for you to review/edit/replace, then you have to do the actual commit.) ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
Re: [fossil-users] import of ancient projects
On Sat, Mar 31, 2012 at 6:06 PM, mlfconv mlf.c...@gmail.com wrote: I'm now at the stage where everything is imported properly and ended up trying to merge A2 and B2 which resulted in 7 merge conflicts, I'm not sure how to display them (possibly via web ui) or even better how to replace that merge with another file, basically ending up with desired fake merge. You can't display the conflicts with fossil, but to simply replace the conflicted file, just copy your desired version over it and commit it. There is no conflict resolution flag which has to be set like there is in svn. -- - stephan beal http://wanderinghorse.net/home/stephan/ http://gplus.to/sgbeal ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
Re: [fossil-users] import of ancient projects
On Wed, 28 Mar 2012 00:56:57 + Marek mlf.c...@gmail.com wrote: so far I've figured that A,B,C,D,E branching is possible (see attachment from previous post) but I can't seem to figure out how to fake insert A3 version instead of doing an actual merge and whether it's possible to continue with the B branch after A3 merge. If the history went like a1 - a2 - a4 - a5, then inserting a3 would mean rewriting the history and probably fossil does not allow it. Sincerely, Gour -- In this endeavor there is no loss or diminution, and a little advancement on this path can protect one from the most dangerous type of fear. http://atmarama.net | Hlapicina (Croatia) | GPG: 52B5C810 signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
Re: [fossil-users] import of ancient projects
Hi Ron, basically i don't want Fossil to perform a merge of A2 and B2 (A is the master branch) but insert another file which only acts as a merge and is tagged or labeled as merge but no actual merge is performed by Fossil, A3 is only inserted instead of merging (A3 actually is a file that merged two distinct features from A2 and B2 which is why I want to keep it as historical record instead of doing an actual merge, also B2 evolved into B3 after merge into A3. Marek Original Message From：Ron Wilson ronw.m...@gmail.com Time：3/28/2012 18:30 To：Fossil SCM user's discussion fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org Subject：Re: [fossil-users] import of ancient projects On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 9:42 AM, mlfconv mlf.c...@gmail.com wrote: it's about importing an ancient project where all source code files are updates and branches to the same file, except no version control software was used at that time, and I'd like to import it so no history rewriting would happen. Instead of doing an actual merge of A2 and B2 into A3 another file is inserted as fake merge as A3, at the same time B2 continues after merge with additional changes as B3. Since oyu just have files, your import is just a matter of creating a repository and a working copy, then populating the working copy with the set file respresenting the initial version, then adding and commiting those files. Then each revision is just a matter of replacing the same-named files in the work area with the set of files represting the next revision. I don't know what you mean by fake merge. Are you saying that A3 is not the parent of A4? If that is the case, then you can have both A3 and A4 as children of A2. Also, in order for Fossil's revion graph to show merges, you have to perform the actual with Fossil. Since the merge does not automatically commit the result, you would have the opportunity to compare the result with the set of files from your original merge and even replace Fossil's result with your own. (I do recommend comparing them first - it might help you find potential problems - either in your source code, your old merge process or even Fossil's merge). ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
Re: [fossil-users] import of ancient projects
On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 12:54 PM, mlfconv mlf.c...@gmail.com wrote: basically i don't want Fossil to perform a merge of A2 and B2 (A is the master branch) but insert another file which only acts as a merge and is tagged or labeled as merge but no actual merge is performed by Fossil, A3 is only inserted instead of merging (A3 actually is a file that merged two distinct features from A2 and B2 which is why I want to keep it as historical record instead of doing an actual merge, also B2 evolved into B3 after merge into A3. As long as you don't mind that the revision graph will not show any indication of a merge, you can just commit A3 as is. If you do want the graph to show a merge, you can do a fossil merge, then replace the result with your A3 before commiting. (As I mentioned, fossil merge does not automatically commit the result of a merge. In your case, it would merge changes from B into your working copy of A2, leaving the resulting files for you to review/edit/replace, then you have to do the actual commit.) ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
