From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: fixing an Elpa package Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2015 08:34:59 -0400 Message-ID: References: <87a8y5ih6c.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> <87wq18hji4.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> <87383vgzk7.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1429533331 4712 80.91.229.3 (20 Apr 2015 12:35:31 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2015 12:35:31 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eric Abrahamsen Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Apr 20 14:35:23 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1YkAv4-0006jY-JM for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 20 Apr 2015 14:35:22 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:53191 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YkAv3-0001ej-Tc for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 20 Apr 2015 08:35:21 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:54703) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YkAup-0001d6-Rb for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 20 Apr 2015 08:35:08 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YkAul-0004gh-IE for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 20 Apr 2015 08:35:07 -0400 Original-Received: from pruche.dit.umontreal.ca ([132.204.246.22]:37764) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YkAul-0004fZ-Ct for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 20 Apr 2015 08:35:03 -0400 Original-Received: from pastel.home (lechon.iro.umontreal.ca [132.204.27.242]) by pruche.dit.umontreal.ca (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id t3KCZ04c015174; Mon, 20 Apr 2015 08:35:00 -0400 Original-Received: by pastel.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id D890348EE; Mon, 20 Apr 2015 08:34:59 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <87383vgzk7.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> (Eric Abrahamsen's message of "Mon, 20 Apr 2015 13:04:56 +0800") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-NAI-Spam-Flag: NO X-NAI-Spam-Threshold: 5 X-NAI-Spam-Score: 0 X-NAI-Spam-Rules: 1 Rules triggered RV5282=0 X-NAI-Spam-Version: 2.3.0.9393 : core <5282> : inlines <2753> : streams <1425605> : uri <1911243> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 132.204.246.22 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:185696 Archived-At: > Okay, thanks for this. Just so I'm very clear: the above command uses > --squash so that Git would pay attention to the metadata in your dummy > commit, but I should not be using --squash from here on out, is that > correct? I'm not sure, to tell you the truth. I never use --squash, so I'm not very familiar with it. But with the current tree, I see that git subtree merge --squash -P packages/gnorb gnorb/master gives me relatively few conflicts, whereas git subtree merge -P packages/gnorb gnorb/master gives me a load of conflicts, so it seems that if you don't provide the "--squash" argument, Git assumes that you haven't used "--squash" in the past either and doesn't look for the commit messages that "--squash" uses to try and find the common ancestor. IOW, if you've used --squash in the past, it's best to keep doing so. You can switch to the non-squash option, of course, if you want. Basically, you can do a git subtree merge -P packages/gnorb 321b23b1ad1b770e2b2bd27921f069b9394ca4d0 git diff | patch -R -p1 git commit -am 'Dummy merge to convert to non-squash subtree' where 321b23b1ad1b770e2b2bd27921f069b9394ca4d0 is the revision up-to-which the branch has already been (squash-)merged. > I ran the command you listed above, resolved the conflicts, and > committed. That gave me one squashed commit containing all the new > commits from my external repo, and another merge commit (this second > commit was huge, and looked like most of the code from the package). Sounds right. > The external and Elpa trees were not in sync, though -- "diff -r" gave > me some differences. These should only be differences due to the commits I installed directly into elpa.git, which you maybe haven't merged in the same way into your tree? [ Just guessing here. ] Stefan