On 22 August 2013 05:34, Tim Peters wrote:
> Anyone know a reason not to do:
>
> hg -y merge --tool=internal:fail 3.2
>
> instead? I saw that idea on some Hg wiki.
That would be from
http://mercurial.selenic.com/wiki/TipsAndTricks#Keep_.22My.22_or_.22Their.22_files_when_doing_a_merge.
I think
[Tim]
>>> ...
>>> Here's what I intend to do (unless an objection appears):
>>>
>>> hg up 3.3
>>> hg merge 3.2
>>> # merge in the v3.2.5 tag definition from .hgtags,
>>> # but revert everything else
>>> hg revert -a -X .hgtags -r .
>>> hg resolve -a -m
>>> hg diff # to ensure that only the v3.2.5
On Wed, 21 Aug 2013 16:59:36 -0400, Terry Reedy wrote:
> On 8/21/2013 4:52 PM, R. David Murray wrote:
> > On Wed, 21 Aug 2013 14:34:33 -0500, Tim Peters wrote:
> >> [Brett]
> >>> ...
> >>> After reading that sentence I realize there is a key "not" missing: "I see
> >>> no reason NOT to help visib
On 8/21/2013 4:52 PM, R. David Murray wrote:
On Wed, 21 Aug 2013 14:34:33 -0500, Tim Peters wrote:
[Brett]
...
After reading that sentence I realize there is a key "not" missing: "I see
no reason NOT to help visibly shutter the 3.2. branch ...". IOW I say do the
null merge. Sorry about that.
On Wed, 21 Aug 2013 14:34:33 -0500, Tim Peters wrote:
> [Brett]
> > ...
> > After reading that sentence I realize there is a key "not" missing: "I see
> > no reason NOT to help visibly shutter the 3.2. branch ...". IOW I say do the
> > null merge. Sorry about that.
>
> No problem! Since I've bee
[Tim]
>> BTW, it's not quite a null-merge. The v3.2.5 release tag doesn't
>> currently exist in the 3.3 or default .hgtags files. So long as 3.2
>> has a topological head, people on the 3.3 and default branches won't
>> notice (unless they look directly at .hgtags - they can still use
>> "v3.2.5"
[Brett]
> ...
> After reading that sentence I realize there is a key "not" missing: "I see
> no reason NOT to help visibly shutter the 3.2. branch ...". IOW I say do the
> null merge. Sorry about that.
No problem! Since I've been inactive for a long time, it's good for
me to practice vigorously d
Le 21/08/2013 14:22, Tim Peters a écrit :
> BTW, it's not quite a null-merge. The v3.2.5 release tag doesn't
> currently exist in the 3.3 or default .hgtags files. So long as 3.2
> has a topological head, people on the 3.3 and default branches won't
> notice (unless they look directly at .hgtags
On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 2:22 PM, Tim Peters wrote:
> [Tim, wondering why the 3.2 branch isn't "inactive"]
> >> ...
> >> So let's try a different question ;-) Would anyone _object_ to
> >> completing the process described in the docs: merge 3.2 into 3.3,
> >> then merge 3.3 into default? I'd be
[Tim, wondering why the 3.2 branch isn't "inactive"]
>> ...
>> So let's try a different question ;-) Would anyone _object_ to
>> completing the process described in the docs: merge 3.2 into 3.3,
>> then merge 3.3 into default? I'd be happy to do that. I'd throw away
>> all the merge changes exc
On 21/08/2013 1:50pm, Victor Stinner wrote:
2013/8/21 Richard Oudkerk :
On 21/08/2013 1:19am, Victor Stinner wrote:
I don't know if a socket handle is similar to file handles or if they
are specials. At least, GetHandleInformation() and
SetHandleInformation() functions, used by
os.get/set_handl
2013/8/21 Richard Oudkerk :
> On 21/08/2013 1:19am, Victor Stinner wrote:
>> I don't know if a socket handle is similar to file handles or if they
>> are specials. At least, GetHandleInformation() and
>> SetHandleInformation() functions, used by
>> os.get/set_handle_inheritable(), accept socket han
On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 8:33 PM, Tim Peters wrote:
> [Tim, wondering why the 3.2 branch isn't "inactive"]
> >> ...
> >> What is gained by _not_ merging here? I don't see it.
>
> [Antoine Pitrou]
> > Perhaps Georg doesn't like merges? ;-)
> > I suppose what's gained is "one less command to type".
On 21/08/2013 1:19am, Victor Stinner wrote:
2013/8/21 Guido van Rossum :
Also, are you sure the things returned by socket.fleno() are really Windows
handles? I thought they were some other artificial namespace used just by
sockets.
(You know what? I know understand and love the UNIX concept
"e
Hi Tim,
On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 5:12 PM, Tim Peters wrote:
> Try running "hg verify -v" - these warnings only appear when verify is
> run in verbose mode.
Indeed. Ignore what I said then about a broken copy of the
repository: any copy will show these three warnings, and they can be
safely ignor
On 08/20/2013 11:15 PM, Ethan Furman wrote:
On 08/14/2013 09:27 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
For enums, I believe they should be formatted like their
base types (so !s and !r will show the enum name, anything without
coercion will show the value) .
I agree. While one of the big reasons for an Enum
16 matches
Mail list logo
