Catalin Marinas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> On Mon, 2005-07-04 at 14:32 +0200, Peter Osterlund wrote:
> > I agree with the other comments, it's probably not wise to rely on
> > wiggle, and wiggle sometimes makes a mess. However, it often does the
> > right thing, and with a configurable merge program and an undo
> > function, this should not be a problem. Just undo and try again if you
> > don't like the result.
> In the today's snapshot you can get the 'stg push --undo' command which
> reverts the result of a push operation (either failed or not). The patch
> is reverted to its previous state. It works even if you ran 'refresh'.

Thanks, this seems to work as expected.

> The current implementation does not remove the .older/.local/.remote
> files from the tree when undoing a push. I think I will first implement
> a 'resolve' command which takes care of these files.
> Anyway, once I fully test the current state of stgit, I will make the
> 0.4 release (probably this weekend).

I've found an unrelated problem. If I export patches with "stg export
dirname", there are no diffs included in the patches. The patch
description is all that is generated. If I omit the dirname parameter,
the export works correctly though.

Peter Osterlund - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at

Reply via email to