[fossil-users] missing branch tag (?)
It appears that somehow the branch tag was deleted on my [trunk]. Now, when I try to merge from trunk - feature_branch, I get something like: $ fossil merge trunk WARNING - no common ancestor: filea.c WARNING - no common ancestor: fileb.c WARNING - no common ancestor: filec.c ... ADDED src/otherfile_a.c ADDED src/otherfile_b.c ADDED src/otherfile_c.c How can I restore the trunkness of trunk through its complete timeline? I tried adding trunk tags, but I didn't suspect they'd work, and I was correct. -- Brad Harder Method Logic Digital Consulting http://www.methodlogic.net/ http://twitter.com/bcharder ___ 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] missing branch tag (?)
Branches are controlled by propagating raw tags. Start with fossil tag list --raw checkin. Then I think you should be able to cancel the offending raw tag. On 9 Oct 2013 23:07, B Harder brad.har...@gmail.com wrote: ...and now I see the edit where the trunk tag was cancelled -- question remains --- can I undo/reverse the effect? On 10/9/13, B Harder brad.har...@gmail.com wrote: It appears that somehow the branch tag was deleted on my [trunk]. Now, when I try to merge from trunk - feature_branch, I get something like: $ fossil merge trunk WARNING - no common ancestor: filea.c WARNING - no common ancestor: fileb.c WARNING - no common ancestor: filec.c ... ADDED src/otherfile_a.c ADDED src/otherfile_b.c ADDED src/otherfile_c.c How can I restore the trunkness of trunk through its complete timeline? I tried adding trunk tags, but I didn't suspect they'd work, and I was correct. -- Brad Harder Method Logic Digital Consulting http://www.methodlogic.net/ http://twitter.com/bcharder -- Brad Harder Method Logic Digital Consulting http://www.methodlogic.net/ http://twitter.com/bcharder ___ 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] missing branch tag (?)
I know what you're talking about, but I'm not seeing the results I hope for. I've made a copy of the repo, and have teased out ea. commit/event SHA1. I've run on ea. SHA1 fossil tag list --raw [sha1_id] and collected that output[0]. The tags look like I'd expect (though I could be mistaken) and the web rendering fits my same mental model... however, when I: fossil co os_x and try to fossil merge trunk, it still fails... Interestingly, I can checkout a certain os_x commit, and merge from anywhere in trunk. The next os_x commit, though, fails. I didn't think os_x tags were at issue, and they *look* sane to me... am I misinterpretting behaviour? [0] Example commit/tag info == [3c239fe86a] == branch=os_x sym-os_x == == [8aa3d3239e] == tkt-537e90fb9d44b8091abd9d04667a66d241e7d13f == == [5c5f613aa8] == branch=trunk sym-trunk == == [60d23a19c0] == branch=vendor sym-vendor == == [ae48737be6] == branch=os_x sym-os_x == On 10/9/13, Mark Janssen mpc.jans...@gmail.com wrote: Branches are controlled by propagating raw tags. Start with fossil tag list --raw checkin. Then I think you should be able to cancel the offending raw tag. On 9 Oct 2013 23:07, B Harder brad.har...@gmail.com wrote: ...and now I see the edit where the trunk tag was cancelled -- question remains --- can I undo/reverse the effect? On 10/9/13, B Harder brad.har...@gmail.com wrote: It appears that somehow the branch tag was deleted on my [trunk]. Now, when I try to merge from trunk - feature_branch, I get something like: $ fossil merge trunk WARNING - no common ancestor: filea.c WARNING - no common ancestor: fileb.c WARNING - no common ancestor: filec.c ... ADDED src/otherfile_a.c ADDED src/otherfile_b.c ADDED src/otherfile_c.c How can I restore the trunkness of trunk through its complete timeline? I tried adding trunk tags, but I didn't suspect they'd work, and I was correct. -- Brad Harder Method Logic Digital Consulting http://www.methodlogic.net/ http://twitter.com/bcharder -- Brad Harder Method Logic Digital Consulting http://www.methodlogic.net/ http://twitter.com/bcharder ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users -- Brad Harder Method Logic Digital Consulting http://www.methodlogic.net/ http://twitter.com/bcharder ___ 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] missing branch tag (?)
I've had something similar happen before and was able to fix it by using the ui to make a branch trunk in several nodes along the trunk timeline until one of them worked. Try it disconnected do as not to mess up the original db. On Oct 9, 2013 3:26 PM, B Harder brad.har...@gmail.com wrote: I know what you're talking about, but I'm not seeing the results I hope for. I've made a copy of the repo, and have teased out ea. commit/event SHA1. I've run on ea. SHA1 fossil tag list --raw [sha1_id] and collected that output[0]. The tags look like I'd expect (though I could be mistaken) and the web rendering fits my same mental model... however, when I: fossil co os_x and try to fossil merge trunk, it still fails... Interestingly, I can checkout a certain os_x commit, and merge from anywhere in trunk. The next os_x commit, though, fails. I didn't think os_x tags were at issue, and they *look* sane to me... am I misinterpretting behaviour? [0] Example commit/tag info == [3c239fe86a] == branch=os_x sym-os_x == == [8aa3d3239e] == tkt-537e90fb9d44b8091abd9d04667a66d241e7d13f == == [5c5f613aa8] == branch=trunk sym-trunk == == [60d23a19c0] == branch=vendor sym-vendor == == [ae48737be6] == branch=os_x sym-os_x == On 10/9/13, Mark Janssen mpc.jans...@gmail.com wrote: Branches are controlled by propagating raw tags. Start with fossil tag list --raw checkin. Then I think you should be able to cancel the offending raw tag. On 9 Oct 2013 23:07, B Harder brad.har...@gmail.com wrote: ...and now I see the edit where the trunk tag was cancelled -- question remains --- can I undo/reverse the effect? On 10/9/13, B Harder brad.har...@gmail.com wrote: It appears that somehow the branch tag was deleted on my [trunk]. Now, when I try to merge from trunk - feature_branch, I get something like: $ fossil merge trunk WARNING - no common ancestor: filea.c WARNING - no common ancestor: fileb.c WARNING - no common ancestor: filec.c ... ADDED src/otherfile_a.c ADDED src/otherfile_b.c ADDED src/otherfile_c.c How can I restore the trunkness of trunk through its complete timeline? I tried adding trunk tags, but I didn't suspect they'd work, and I was correct. -- Brad Harder Method Logic Digital Consulting http://www.methodlogic.net/ http://twitter.com/bcharder -- Brad Harder Method Logic Digital Consulting http://www.methodlogic.net/ http://twitter.com/bcharder ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users -- Brad Harder Method Logic Digital Consulting http://www.methodlogic.net/ http://twitter.com/bcharder ___ 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] missing branch tag (?)
Matt - not a bad idea, though I'm not entirely sure where to proceed now. What I think (hope?) I have is two branches: trunk, and os_x os_x originally branched off trunk (as all things do, in some form or another). I've got an entry in os_x (an old one) where I can: fossil co [old os_x entry] fossil merge trunk and everything appears to work fine. This is merging the very tip of trunk, which I expect. Consider that operation only a proof of concept; let's get rid of that merge (fossil revert), and : fossil info, get the child of that good os_x current checkout. fossil co [child-of-os_x] fossil merge trunk ^ failure. So, it appears to me that in the single transition from [good-os_x] to [bad-os_x], something is amiss. I did have suspicious looking tagging in [trunk], but perhaps that was a red herring in this matter. I'm at a loss to wrap my head around where the child of a working checkout can't merge the same as its parent. And where I *thought* it was [trunk] that was at issue, now it could be (?) os_x ? Flummoxed. -bch On 10/9/13, Matt Welland estifo...@gmail.com wrote: I've had something similar happen before and was able to fix it by using the ui to make a branch trunk in several nodes along the trunk timeline until one of them worked. Try it disconnected do as not to mess up the original db. On Oct 9, 2013 3:26 PM, B Harder brad.har...@gmail.com wrote: I know what you're talking about, but I'm not seeing the results I hope for. I've made a copy of the repo, and have teased out ea. commit/event SHA1. I've run on ea. SHA1 fossil tag list --raw [sha1_id] and collected that output[0]. The tags look like I'd expect (though I could be mistaken) and the web rendering fits my same mental model... however, when I: fossil co os_x and try to fossil merge trunk, it still fails... Interestingly, I can checkout a certain os_x commit, and merge from anywhere in trunk. The next os_x commit, though, fails. I didn't think os_x tags were at issue, and they *look* sane to me... am I misinterpretting behaviour? [0] Example commit/tag info == [3c239fe86a] == branch=os_x sym-os_x == == [8aa3d3239e] == tkt-537e90fb9d44b8091abd9d04667a66d241e7d13f == == [5c5f613aa8] == branch=trunk sym-trunk == == [60d23a19c0] == branch=vendor sym-vendor == == [ae48737be6] == branch=os_x sym-os_x == On 10/9/13, Mark Janssen mpc.jans...@gmail.com wrote: Branches are controlled by propagating raw tags. Start with fossil tag list --raw checkin. Then I think you should be able to cancel the offending raw tag. On 9 Oct 2013 23:07, B Harder brad.har...@gmail.com wrote: ...and now I see the edit where the trunk tag was cancelled -- question remains --- can I undo/reverse the effect? On 10/9/13, B Harder brad.har...@gmail.com wrote: It appears that somehow the branch tag was deleted on my [trunk]. Now, when I try to merge from trunk - feature_branch, I get something like: $ fossil merge trunk WARNING - no common ancestor: filea.c WARNING - no common ancestor: fileb.c WARNING - no common ancestor: filec.c ... ADDED src/otherfile_a.c ADDED src/otherfile_b.c ADDED src/otherfile_c.c How can I restore the trunkness of trunk through its complete timeline? I tried adding trunk tags, but I didn't suspect they'd work, and I was correct. -- Brad Harder Method Logic Digital Consulting http://www.methodlogic.net/ http://twitter.com/bcharder -- Brad Harder Method Logic Digital Consulting http://www.methodlogic.net/ http://twitter.com/bcharder ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users -- Brad Harder Method Logic Digital Consulting http://www.methodlogic.net/ http://twitter.com/bcharder ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users -- Brad Harder Method Logic Digital Consulting http://www.methodlogic.net/ http://twitter.com/bcharder ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
