I rebuilt the image, then reloaded OSSubprocess from my own clone, on top of the one loaded by GitFileTree no metadata reappeared (so far…)
On 20 January 2016 at 20:45, Mariano Martinez Peck <[email protected]> wrote: > No, something wrong is happening. GitFileTree should have NOT generated > neither "version" nor "methodProperties" files. > :( > > On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 4:37 PM, Damien Pollet <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> So ? I put *.methodProperties in .gitignore ? >> What about .gitattributes for the merge driver ? >> >> On 20 January 2016 at 20:19, Mariano Martinez Peck <[email protected] >> > wrote: >> >>> Damien, I think the "metadata-less" name is a bit wrong. I think you did >>> it correct. >>> The metadataless is that only SOME of the metadata is ignored, such as >>> "version" and I don't remember what else. >>> I am comparing the HEAD of your clone with mine and we seem to have the >>> same .filetree and .json so I think we are fine. >>> >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 4:09 PM, Damien Pollet <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Hm. I saved code in a clone of Mariano's project, and a bunch of >>>> metadata files were created. Did I miss a step on configuring the repo so >>>> it's metadataless ? >>>> >>>> On 16 January 2016 at 15:18, Mariano Martinez Peck < >>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> OK, thanks Thierry. >>>>> >>>>> BTW, thanks for all the help you have been giving me in the last weeks >>>>> and for your great GitFileTree :) >>>>> >>>>> On Sat, Jan 16, 2016 at 11:14 AM, Thierry Goubier < >>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Le 16/01/2016 15:06, Mariano Martinez Peck a écrit : >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Sat, Jan 16, 2016 at 5:15 AM, Thierry Goubier >>>>>>> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Le 16/01/2016 03:23, Mariano Martinez Peck a écrit : >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi guys, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> First, let me say that I found very cool that I can do a "git >>>>>>> checkout >>>>>>> X" from command line, and from Pharo, opening the MC browser >>>>>>> detects I >>>>>>> am in another branch and everything seems to work. So I guess >>>>>>> that's the >>>>>>> way I manage branches? Simply "git checkout X" and then go >>>>>>> to MC >>>>>>> , and >>>>>>> do a "load" of the last version of the repo? (or another >>>>>>> image, >>>>>>> whatever). >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Yes, exactly. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> OK. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The problem is now with merging. Not necessary about the >>>>>>> metadata ( I >>>>>>> guess we have less metadata conflicts with Metadata-less >>>>>>> GitFileTree >>>>>>> right???) , but real code changes conflicts between branches. >>>>>>> How do you >>>>>>> manage this? You manage everything at Git level using git and >>>>>>> text editors? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> yes, or with git gui tools, or with the github interface (if >>>>>>> there >>>>>>> is no conflict). The only thing a bit problematic are the >>>>>>> eventual >>>>>>> conflicts, but, in that metadata-less format, they are less >>>>>>> frequent >>>>>>> and easier to solve. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> OK... but let me confirm... with metadata-less gitfiletree, would I >>>>>>> still benefit from >>>>>>> https://github.com/ThierryGoubier/GitFileTree-MergeDriver >>>>>>> to minimize conflicts? >>>>>>> Or that was when you were having filetree with metadata? >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> The merge driver does three things: >>>>>> - merge metadata version files >>>>>> - merge method properties json files >>>>>> - merge class definition json files (merge instances variables from >>>>>> both branches) >>>>>> >>>>>> Items one and two do not exist anymore in metadata-less format. Third >>>>>> one is not allways seen as a good thing. >>>>>> >>>>>> So the merge driver is rarely usefull in metadata-less mode. >>>>>> >>>>>> I cannot think how to do that from MC browser "Merge" because >>>>>>> MC >>>>>>> sees >>>>>>> only one repo associated to one current branch. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> It is possible to do the merge in MC (think of merging your >>>>>>> current >>>>>>> working copy and the top of the branch) but they won't be >>>>>>> recorded >>>>>>> in the git log as a merge. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> OK. I prefer git to see it as a merge. But thanks anyway. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I understand and do the same. Moreover, git is better than MC in my >>>>>> opinion to do the merge properly. >>>>>> >>>>>> Thierry >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Mariano >>>>> http://marianopeck.wordpress.com >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Damien Pollet >>>> type less, do more [ | ] http://people.untyped.org/damien.pollet >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Mariano >>> http://marianopeck.wordpress.com >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Damien Pollet >> type less, do more [ | ] http://people.untyped.org/damien.pollet >> > > > > -- > Mariano > http://marianopeck.wordpress.com > -- Damien Pollet type less, do more [ | ] http://people.untyped.org/damien.pollet
