Re: [Pharo-dev] Git breaks Monticello's version numbers

2017-05-16 Thread Eliot Miranda
Hi Esteban, forgive me if what I say causes conflict. I do not wish to cause conflict; quite the opposite. But I must say something on this issue as it is very important to me. On Sat, May 13, 2017 at 7:21 AM, Esteban Lorenzano wrote: > > On 13 May 2017, at 16:17,

Re: [Pharo-dev] Git breaks Monticello's version numbers

2017-05-13 Thread Ben Coman
Could a pragmatic fix be simply... if the first-generated MC version number is greater than 1, then re-generate the MC version number based off the latest version number in the MC repository. But the bigger question is for... v1(MC) --> v2(git) --> v3(git) --> v4(git) --> v5(MC) what

Re: [Pharo-dev] Git breaks Monticello's version numbers

2017-05-13 Thread Thierry Goubier
Le 13/05/2017 à 16:17, Esteban Lorenzano a écrit : On 13 May 2017, at 15:51, Thierry Goubier wrote: Le 13/05/2017 à 15:43, Esteban Lorenzano a écrit : On 13 May 2017, at 13:16, Yuriy Tymchuk wrote: I’m not a bit expert, but if you don’t

Re: [Pharo-dev] Git breaks Monticello's version numbers

2017-05-13 Thread Esteban Lorenzano
> On 13 May 2017, at 16:17, Esteban Lorenzano wrote: > >> >> On 13 May 2017, at 15:51, Thierry Goubier wrote: >> >> Le 13/05/2017 à 15:43, Esteban Lorenzano a écrit : >>> >>> On 13 May 2017, at 13:16, Yuriy Tymchuk

Re: [Pharo-dev] Git breaks Monticello's version numbers

2017-05-13 Thread Esteban Lorenzano
> On 13 May 2017, at 15:51, Thierry Goubier wrote: > > Le 13/05/2017 à 15:43, Esteban Lorenzano a écrit : >> >> >>> On 13 May 2017, at 13:16, Yuriy Tymchuk >>> wrote: >>> >>> I’m not a bit expert, but if you don’t use “metadataless” format

Re: [Pharo-dev] Git breaks Monticello's version numbers

2017-05-13 Thread Esteban Lorenzano
> On 13 May 2017, at 15:37, Oleks wrote: > > So basically, this is not a bug, but the way Iceberg and Monticello are > built? > And there is no point in reporting it because it can't be fixed? It doesn’t has to be fixed because is not a bug > > Oleks > > > > -- >

Re: [Pharo-dev] Git breaks Monticello's version numbers

2017-05-13 Thread Thierry Goubier
Le 13/05/2017 à 15:43, Esteban Lorenzano a écrit : On 13 May 2017, at 13:16, Yuriy Tymchuk wrote: I’m not a bit expert, but if you don’t use “metadataless” format everything works fine with monticello. I.e. each git commit contains all the mc history. yes, but with

Re: [Pharo-dev] Git breaks Monticello's version numbers

2017-05-13 Thread Yuriy Tymchuk
Ok… I’m pretty sure Iceberg did not delete my MC metadata. Maybe I used it too long ago for my project > On 13 May 2017, at 15:43, Esteban Lorenzano wrote: > > > >> On 13 May 2017, at 13:16, Yuriy Tymchuk wrote: >> >> I’m not a bit expert, but if

Re: [Pharo-dev] Git breaks Monticello's version numbers

2017-05-13 Thread Oleks
So basically, this is not a bug, but the way Iceberg and Monticello are built? And there is no point in reporting it because it can't be fixed? Oleks -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/Git-breaks-Monticello-s-version-numbers-tp4946939p4946997.html Sent from the Pharo

Re: [Pharo-dev] Git breaks Monticello's version numbers

2017-05-13 Thread Esteban Lorenzano
> On 13 May 2017, at 13:16, Yuriy Tymchuk wrote: > > I’m not a bit expert, but if you don’t use “metadataless” format everything > works fine with monticello. I.e. each git commit contains all the mc history. yes, but with iceberg we did another choice: we force

Re: [Pharo-dev] Git breaks Monticello's version numbers

2017-05-13 Thread Yuriy Tymchuk
I’m not a bit expert, but if you don’t use “metadataless” format everything works fine with monticello. I.e. each git commit contains all the mc history. Uko > On 13 May 2017, at 09:28, Thierry Goubier wrote: > > Le 13/05/2017 à 08:58, Stephane Ducasse a écrit : >>

Re: [Pharo-dev] Git breaks Monticello's version numbers

2017-05-13 Thread Thierry Goubier
Le 13/05/2017 à 08:58, Stephane Ducasse a écrit : My gut feeling is that it will be better not to mix git and MC. It is easy to make MC compatible with Git. It wasn't that hard in the past, but needed a community effort (MC being a core part of the system). Now, with the infrastructure

Re: [Pharo-dev] Git breaks Monticello's version numbers

2017-05-13 Thread Max Leske
> On 12 May 2017, at 23:09, Oleksandr Zaytsev wrote: > > Hello > > Two days ago I was trying to send the slice with my fix to PolyMath using > Monticello. But the version number got set to 1494471195. Today I realized > that all the packages to which I commit are

Re: [Pharo-dev] Git breaks Monticello's version numbers

2017-05-13 Thread Stephane Ducasse
My gut feeling is that it will be better not to mix git and MC. On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 11:09 PM, Oleksandr Zaytsev wrote: > Hello > > Two days ago I was trying to send the slice with my fix to PolyMath using > Monticello. But the version number got set to 1494471195.

[Pharo-dev] Git breaks Monticello's version numbers

2017-05-12 Thread Oleksandr Zaytsev
Hello Two days ago I was trying to send the slice with my fix to PolyMath using Monticello. But the version number got set to 1494471195. Today I realized that all the packages to which I commit are numbered like that. Cyril Ferlicot explained to me that this happens when I mix git and