dolfin team mailing list archive

["Garth N. Wells" <gnw20@xxxxxxxxx>]

On 1 November 2011 09:28, Anders Logg <logg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 01, 2011 at 07:55:33AM +0000, Garth N. Wells wrote:
>
>> On 1 Nov 2011, at 03:42, Johan Hake <johan.hake@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> > Hello!
>> >
>> > What is the actuall differences between these two brances now. I have
>> > something I would like to get into lp:dolfin/1.0.x, but unfortunately I have
>> > synced my branch with lp:dolfin.
>> >
>> > Is there features that are in lp:dolfin which should not be dragged into
>> > lp:dolfin/1.0.x? In that case I wont merge my branch with lp:dolfin/1.0.x but
>> > rather try to cherry pick the revisions.
>> >
>>
>> Yes, there is now code in lp:dolfin that should not be merged into 1.0.
>
> As far as I understand, we should never merge trunk into 1.0.x but it
> should always (or at least for some time) be safe to merge 1.0.x into
> trunk.
>
> So bug fixes should always happen first in 1.0.x and then be merged
> into trunk.
>
> I know not everyone agrees with me on this (the append_revisions_only
> issue)

I don't think that it's a case of agree or disagree. I think we all
agree on how we should attempt to work. Where we is disagree is that I
don't think that it's the end of the world if it doesn't always work
out.

> but I think this will be much cleaner if the merge always
> happens *from* the branch that stuff should be merged into.
>
>  cd ../trunk
>  bzr merge ../1.0.x
>  bzr commit
>  # then bzr push lp:dolfin if trunk is not a bound branch
>

This is how I've been working over the past few days. It would though
be nice to know how to pull individual change sets from one repository
into another.

Garth


> --
> Anders
>