Am Samstag, 15. August 2015, 15:33:54 schrieb Bram Moolenaar: > > Christian Brabandt wrote: > > > > > On Do, 13 Aug 2015, Bram Moolenaar wrote: > > > > > > > > > Then, I want to check in a change to Google code only, that produces > > > > > an > > > > > error when trying to build that version. This is because there is no > > > > > way to stop the Mercurial repository from serving, users who simply > > > > > pull > > > > > there won't notice anything wrong (except not getting any more > > > > > updates). > > > > > So you would need to halt your update script before that happens, and > > > > > sync from github. This *should* have the same version history then. > > > > > > > > I already sync from github ;) > > > > > > > > But if you check in an error to google code, that means, users won't be > > > > able to just switch the repository URL, because a commit would be > > > > missing? Can't we just keep the Google Code repository alone? It will > > > > be > > > > closed in January anyhow, so users should notice 4 month later when the > > > > urls won't work anymore. > > > > > > If it works better to have a linear sequence, we could checkin the > > > change to Google code, and then in the new repository revert it. > > > > Yes, that's what I am going to do. I will sync the broken commit and > > then revert it. After that the sync from the github repository should > > work. > > I don't know what you mean with "revert it". I was thinking of applying > a patch to break it, then applying a patch to unbreak it, do the > reverse. If you stop in between you get the broken version, which will > be the end state on Google code.
I guess with "revert it" he meant the same as you with "applying a patch to unbreak it". > > > The only problem with this is that there won't be a grace period, the > > > moment I do this everybody is forced to switch over. Hmm, unless I > > > delay pushing this change to Mercurial, which means I have to keep this > > > locally when converting to git. That would work. > > > > Just tell me, when you are going to do this. I will then reclone and > > setup everything afterwards. I need some time, in the evening next week > > would be good. > > I think I found a way to do this: I push the last patch to Google code, > then locally apply the patch to break it. Copy this repository, and > apply the unbreak patch to the copy. Then convert the copy to git and > push this to github. A week later or so I push to Google code from the > original repo, thus pushing the break patch. At any point the github > repo has a linear line of commits on top of the Mercurial repo. In the git cleanup I would remove those two unneeded commits, they break "bisect". Thus we could as well do the Git conversion from the last valid HG state before invalidation and HG mirror setup. Isn't Danek's suggestion with merging the build error back instead of applying the reverting patch suitable? -- -- 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 --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "vim_dev" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
