On Saturday 21 August 2010 15:52:09 Xavier de Gaye wrote: > On Sat, Aug 21, 2010 at 6:48 PM, Tony Mechelynck wrote: > > On 18/08/10 14:49, Xavier de Gaye wrote: > >> Actually, having multiple heads in the same branch may be > >> considered as not a problem. When we have local changes, > >> after pulling from the official repository, in order to > >> merge the new official changesets into our own local > >> changes, we now have to run (where<highest revision number> > >> is given by 'hg heads' for example): > >> > >> hg merge -r<highest revision number> > >> > >> instead of previously with only one head: > >> > >> hg merge > > > > Also, with multiple heads in the current branch, the "fetch" > > extension cannot be used: instead of one command > > > > hg fetch --switch-parent > > > > you have to run three > > > > hg pull -u > > hg merge -r ab3fc5de6b49 > > hg commit -m 'merge for patchlevel 7.3.004' > > > > and the text for the latter two (or at least for the middle > > one) varies every time.
> You may also run: > hg pull > hg merge -r tip > hg commit -m 'Automated merge with > http://vim.googlecode.com/hg/' > Nothing varies in the above three statements, and these > statements can go in a 'my_fetch.sh' script. unless and until runtime/doc/tags needs a commit, in which case you'll need an extra commit between the pull and the merge i keep thinking it should be easy to write an expect script to test for merge success and automating that, but i'm too new to expect for it to be easy for me sc -- You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist. Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying to. For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
