Hi Petr, > It seems my GIT client recently committed [1] John McCullough's patch > [2] which adds support for CAN devices. > It was an accident. By looking in the repository I do not even know > the meaning of what I just did. It doesn't look that bad, indeed it seems that you did it right (except for a point which you can argue, see below). You didn't commit that patch, I did, and you should have received a message about this a bit ago.
Basically, what happened is probably the following situation: 1. You updated your simulavr clone a bit ago, with a HEAD pointing to commit 122d192 2. You started working on this head (perfectly fine), committing your changes which are in commit e92725a 3. I committed John McCullough's patch as f56acc77 one the same HEAD of 122d192. 4. I pushed that change to the repository so tha the savannah's HEAD pointed to f56acc77. 5. This is now incompatible with the history of your repository and either a merge or a rebase of your changes needed to happen. Incompatible means that you were not able to push these changes back, as that would have lost my patch as a push can only be a forward to another commit, with an intact history leading to it, but basically your commit was not matching the existing history anymore. Now, mostly, people do a rebase of their own stuff onto the current upstream HEAD instead of a merge for a set of upstream changes, if possible, to avoid creating a more complex devel history. But a merge is perfectly fine. That's the only point that can be argued. You witnessed the distributed version control system in action :-) 6. The merge merged the upstream master into your repository (you probably did a git pull, right?), and this happened in your local git repository 7. Because the merge is merging my latest commit and yours together, it is now a valid successor to what it is in the upstream git (where the HEAD still points to f56acc77). Thus, it can be pushed upstream. You did that and everything is fine :-) > I do understand the theory how git works (heck, I even read the > algebraic theory of patches) but I not understand what operations my > client offers to me and what those messages mean. I hope the above clarifies it. If not, ask again. > > Do you recommend some user-friendly Git client for Windows? I only know of TortoiseGIT and only used it a time ago as it was still considered to be in heavy development, but the basic stuff should work? What is the exact complaint? Cheers, Onno _______________________________________________ Simulavr-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/simulavr-devel
