On 05/13/2011 12:36 AM, Ondrej Certik wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 12:52 PM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn
<d.s.seljeb...@astro.uio.no> wrote:
There was just a messup in git history: Mark's OpenMP pull request got
merged twice; all commits show up two times.
It doesn't matter, since the two openmp branches with the same changes
merged OK, but we shouldn't make this a habit. For instance, the openMP
commits also show up as part of vitja's pull request, which is confusing.
In Mercurial speak: The openmp branch was used like you would use a
Mercurial "patch queue" in one case, and as a branch in another case. In git
they are the same technically and you rely on conventions to make sure you
don't treat a "queue" as a "branch".
OPTION A) Either i) only branch from master, or ii) make sure you agree with
whoever you're branching from that this is a "branch", not a "patch queue",
so that it isn't rebased under your feet.
We could also, say, prepend all patch queues with an underscore (its
private).
OPTION B) Stop rebasing. I'd have a very hard time doing that myself, but
nobody are pulling from dagss/cython these days anyway.
What about:
OPTION C) The one who pushes things into the master knows master
enough to see whether or not it makes sense to merge this, or if it
was already in, he/she will simply comment into the pull request and
close it manually
This doesn't make sense to me. Are you sure you read the scenario correctly?
Dag Sverre
_______________________________________________
cython-devel mailing list
cython-devel@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/cython-devel
