dolfin team mailing list archive

[Anders Logg <logg@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, Nov 01, 2011 at 10:14:33AM +0000, Garth N. Wells wrote:
> 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.

Fine. But I still don't see in which case this doesn't work out. Will
it not always work to do

  cd ../trunk
  bzr merge ../foo

?

> > 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.

Martin claims this works but I don't know how.

--
Anders