"Mark F. Adams" <[email protected]> writes: > [amend to add important part of error message] > > I am trying to rebase -i, where I squashed one commit message, and get this > error: > > 12:31 madams/sr-driver2 ~/Codes/petsc$ git pull > Merge made by the 'recursive' strategy.
Where did this come from? This merge probably causes lots of problems. Given the merge chaos in your current branch, I might instead fix it by creating a new branch, merging in the dependencies that you will need, and then cherry-picking and squashing/amending one commit at a time from the madams/sr-driver2. That is $ git checkout -b madams/sr-driver3 knepley/feature-plex-refine-3d $ git merge knepley/fix-plex-ghost-cells $ git cherry-pick [sha1 for "start of segmental refinement"] $ git cherry-pick [sha1 for "..."] $ git cherry-pick [sha1 for "temp version"] $ git rebase -i HEAD~2 # squash the last two commits and write a commit message $ git cherry-pick [...] You can cherry-pick the whole series and then amend if you prefer. But in any case, it's important to get the work you need to fix up _on top of_ the stable branches you depend on rather than the other way around. > 12:31 madams/sr-driver2 ~/Codes/petsc$ git rebase -i HEAD~10 > [detached HEAD 319baff] TS ex32: Added a parallel test > Author: Matthew G. Knepley <[email protected]> > 2 files changed, 32 insertions(+), 27 deletions(-) > The previous cherry-pick is now empty, possibly due to conflict resolution. > If you wish to commit it anyway, use: > > git commit --allow-empty > > Otherwise, please use 'git reset' > # rebase in progress; onto a704522 > # You are currently rebasing branch 'madams/sr-driver2' on 'a704522'. > # (all conflicts fixed: run "git rebase --continue") > # > [snip] > Could not apply 29a5cbd... Compiler: Fix warnings from MPI impls which do not > initialize outputs > > > > On Oct 24, 2013, at 11:31 AM, Jed Brown <[email protected]> wrote: > >> @madams This branch is totally unreviewable in its current form, and >> it cannot be bisected because many of the intermediate states are >> broken. I understand making haphazard/checkpoint commits while >> developing, but to maintain reviewability and quality in the long term, >> it's important to organize the commits so that they can be understood in >> sequence. Commit messages like "...", "temp version", and "cleaning up" >> force the reviewer to read the commit in its entirety to have any idea >> what it is supposed to accomplish. This makes it difficult to keep >> track of what is happening, which discourages people from following >> development, avoiding duplicate/conflicting work, etc. >> >> We have to support everything that goes into PETSc, but if we can't >> follow development, we give outdated advice and end up unable to answer >> questions. >> >> Most people working on PETSc are organizing their commits to be >> reviewable these days. We can go to the commit and branch lists (in the >> web interface or with Git locally) and the first line of the commit >> message gives a good summary of what the commit is accomplishing, the >> body of the commit message explains why it is important/who may be >> impacted by the change, and the commit itself accomplishes something >> that the viewer can check. This allows other developers to quickly get >> the gist of what is in a branch, what may be interesting to look at in >> more detail, etc. >> >> Commit topology and messages are key means by which developers >> communicate with each other. It really doesn't take much effort once >> you get in the habit of organizing commits as a means of communication >> rather than as a log with arbitrary checkpoints. >> >> Any other means of communication, such as pull request summaries or >> mailing list threads, are secondary sources, inherently more error-prone >> and higher effort to evaluate, and provide less structure for automated >> diagnostics/summaries. >> >> https://bitbucket.org/petsc/petsc/wiki/writing-commit-messages >> >> Git provides good tools for reordering/squashing/amending commits, so >> it's possible to develop in clutter and then organize when it's time to >> communicate to other people. >> >> >> This PR is blocked on some of Matt's long-running branches. @knepley >> When will 'knepley/feature-dmda-section' and >> 'knepley/feature-plex-refine-3d' be ready to merge? >> >> Mark Adams <[email protected]> writes: >> >>> --- you can reply above this line --- >>> >>> A new pull request has been opened by Mark Adams. >>> >>> madams/sr-driver2 has changes to be pulled into master. >>> >>> https://bitbucket.org/petsc/petsc/pull-request/109/added-at-test-simplified-version-of-ex11 >>> >>> Title: Added at test, simplified version of ex11, convergence test. Uses >>> differencing to produce matrix in stand alone code, fixed SNES to support >>> this. >>> >>> Changes to be pulled: >>> >>> c1fa6a8934f2 by Mark Adams: "cleanup jed's cherry picked version" >>> e7b0c4510d02 by Jed Brown: "Merge branch 'knepley/fix-plex-ghost-cells' >>> into jed/sr-driver >>> >>> DMLabelFilter is…" >>> c56f055af68b by Mark Adams: "finished up adding serial DMPlex test with a >>> convergance test on a 5-point Lapla…" >>> 8fdc87fb42d2 by Mark Adams: "cleaning up" >>> 0fb202fbc65d by Mark Adams: "cleaning up >>> >>> Conflicts: >>> src/ts/examples/tutorials/makefile" >>> ... and 112 more. >>> >>> >>> -- >>> >>> Unsubscribe from pull request emails for this repository. >>> https://bitbucket.org/petsc/petsc/pull-request/109/unsubscribe/jedbrown/bc8a9c9283892888c102096c5dadc4a6a692a4fe/
pgpB_dk5Obf2B.pgp
Description: PGP signature
