Satish Balay <[email protected]> writes:

> You mean 'origin/master' was ahead of 'origin' by 44 commits?
>
> The following looks ok to me. [presumably 
> 9780fa96a767300e577882a0af3393de3467f0b4
> was where 'master' was at - when you tried to push..]
>
> $ git log 
> 9780fa96a767300e577882a0af3393de3467f0b4..23524bc85f88d7c2c867e276c52fc9d9816c7ba0
> commit 23524bc85f88d7c2c867e276c52fc9d9816c7ba0
> Merge: a45e4fd 9780fa9
> Author: Mark Adams <[email protected]>
> Date:   Sun Mar 29 07:56:12 2015 -0700
>
>     Merge branch 'master' of https://bitbucket.org/petsc/petsc

This is a merge from upstream.  You're supposed to pull first, then
merge your branch.

https://bitbucket.org/petsc/petsc/wiki/developer-instructions-git#markdown-header-racy-integration

What you did makes it harder to interpret the history and more difficult
to summarize changes using --first-parent.  It's not a catastrophe, not
ideal either.

> commit a45e4fd2de284282fd0ffec31edee9d059d8ad33
> Author: Mark Adams <[email protected]>
> Date:   Sun Mar 29 07:55:57 2015 -0700
>
>     fixed example to compile - demonstrates a bug

What bug?  Is it an open bug?  Is there a failing test?  How can I
possibly find out?  (This commit message could be better.)

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to