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] http://web.telia.com/~u89404340 - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
