Manphiz writes:
> Nicholas D Steeves writes:
>
>> Hi manphiz,
>>
>> Manphiz writes:
>>
>>> Xiyue Deng writes:
>>>
>>> Hi sten,
>>>
>>> When trying to pick a new upstream to rebase, I found that pulling
>>> either upstream repo will result in an incompatible git history versus
>>> the current
Nicholas D Steeves writes:
> Hi manphiz,
>
> Manphiz writes:
>
>> Xiyue Deng writes:
>>
>> Hi sten,
>>
>> When trying to pick a new upstream to rebase, I found that pulling
>> either upstream repo will result in an incompatible git history versus
>> the current debian/master branch on salsa.
>
Hi manphiz,
Manphiz writes:
> Xiyue Deng writes:
>
> Hi sten,
>
> When trying to pick a new upstream to rebase, I found that pulling
> either upstream repo will result in an incompatible git history versus
> the current debian/master branch on salsa.
This is expected, but please merge from
David Bremner writes:
> Manphiz writes:
>
>>
>> Hi sten,
>>
>> When trying to pick a new upstream to rebase, I found that pulling
>> either upstream repo will result in an incompatible git history versus
>> the current debian/master branch on salsa. I wonder how I should handle
>> this? Is it
Manphiz writes:
>
> Hi sten,
>
> When trying to pick a new upstream to rebase, I found that pulling
> either upstream repo will result in an incompatible git history versus
> the current debian/master branch on salsa. I wonder how I should handle
> this? Is it OK to force push to master? Will
Xiyue Deng writes:
> Package: elpa-muse
> Severity: minor
> X-Debbugs-Cc: none, Xiyue Deng
>
> Currently muse-el has two main upstream repositories: one from Elpa
> external branch[1], one from github[2], and the two has diverged
> somehow. We should decide on which repo to track in d/watch.
>
6 matches
Mail list logo
