From: Karl Fogel <kfogel@red-bean.com>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
Cc: tom@tromey.com, raeburn@raeburn.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org
Subject: Re: Please test the merge of the concurrency branch
Date: Sun, 11 Dec 2016 21:05:47 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87mvg1j184.fsf@red-bean.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <837f78gt0f.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Sat, 10 Dec 2016 09:09:20 +0200")
Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
>> By the way, I also built an earlier revision (I don't remember the
>> rev id now) from the branch, and used it for about an hour, likewise
>> with no problems. Then at some point I did 'git pull' and was
>> surprised to get a merge -- surprised, because I had no local
>> modifications. I assume this means you or someone rebased the
>> branch at some point?
>
>Which branch? concurrency or test-concurrency? These are different
>branches; the latter is actually master with concurrency merged into
>it (in de4624c), and with some followup commits to fix problems.
'test-concurrency' only.
>If you checked out the test-concurrency branch, then there were no
>rebases on it since it was pushed, a day before I announced it. I
>only added a few commits since then.
Hunh. Well, I don't know what happened, in that case. My local repository definitely didn't like two successive pulls a couple of hours apart, on the test-concurrency branch. I did 'git reset --hard HEAD' after the first time and then re-pulled, to make sure I was really seeing what I thought I was seeing. I had no local modifications or anything (if I had I would have stashed them).
Since there's no easy way to reconstruct or debug it now, and the branch has landed on master anyway, I guess I'll let this remain a mystery.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-12-12 3:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 56+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-12-09 14:45 Please test the merge of the concurrency branch Eli Zaretskii
2016-12-09 15:30 ` Robert Marshall
2016-12-09 16:26 ` Eli Zaretskii
2016-12-09 16:40 ` Paul Eggert
2016-12-09 16:54 ` Eli Zaretskii
2016-12-09 16:58 ` jpff
2016-12-09 17:06 ` Eli Zaretskii
2016-12-09 16:52 ` Robert Marshall
2016-12-09 23:09 ` Clément Pit--Claudel
2016-12-10 7:14 ` Eli Zaretskii
2016-12-10 15:05 ` Clément Pit--Claudel
2016-12-10 15:50 ` Eli Zaretskii
2016-12-09 22:33 ` David Caldwell
2016-12-10 6:50 ` Eli Zaretskii
2016-12-10 13:14 ` Alan Third
2016-12-10 14:06 ` Eli Zaretskii
2016-12-09 22:58 ` Karl Fogel
2016-12-10 7:09 ` Eli Zaretskii
2016-12-12 3:05 ` Karl Fogel [this message]
2016-12-09 23:19 ` Andrés Ramírez
2016-12-10 7:14 ` Eli Zaretskii
2016-12-10 8:09 ` Andreas Politz
2016-12-10 9:07 ` Eli Zaretskii
2016-12-10 16:05 ` Joseph Mingrone
2016-12-10 17:50 ` Eli Zaretskii
2016-12-10 16:33 ` Achim Gratz
2016-12-10 16:56 ` Filipe Silva
2016-12-10 17:56 ` Eli Zaretskii
2016-12-10 17:52 ` Eli Zaretskii
2016-12-10 17:36 ` Concurrency has landed (was: Please test the merge of the concurrency branch) Eli Zaretskii
2016-12-10 18:24 ` Concurrency has landed Eli Zaretskii
2016-12-10 18:26 ` raman
2016-12-10 18:36 ` Eli Zaretskii
2016-12-10 19:22 ` Paul Eggert
2016-12-22 4:52 ` Daniel Colascione
2016-12-22 19:23 ` Paul Eggert
2016-12-22 19:32 ` Daniel Colascione
2016-12-22 19:56 ` Paul Eggert
2016-12-24 0:52 ` Stefan Monnier
2016-12-24 1:51 ` Paul Eggert
2016-12-24 4:49 ` Stefan Monnier
2016-12-24 5:04 ` Paul Eggert
2016-12-22 19:57 ` Davis Herring
2016-12-13 12:28 ` Phillip Lord
2016-12-13 16:09 ` Eli Zaretskii
2016-12-11 2:51 ` Please test the merge of the concurrency branch Ken Raeburn
2016-12-11 3:33 ` Eli Zaretskii
2016-12-11 19:40 ` Peter Wang
2016-12-11 20:31 ` Eli Zaretskii
2016-12-11 9:11 ` Michael Albinus
2016-12-11 13:54 ` Ken Raeburn
2016-12-11 15:14 ` Tramp and concurrency (was: Please test the merge of the concurrency branch) Michael Albinus
2016-12-11 15:45 ` Please test the merge of the concurrency branch Eli Zaretskii
2016-12-11 18:30 ` Daimrod
2016-12-11 18:42 ` Eli Zaretskii
2016-12-11 19:02 ` Daimrod
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=87mvg1j184.fsf@red-bean.com \
--to=kfogel@red-bean.com \
--cc=eliz@gnu.org \
--cc=emacs-devel@gnu.org \
--cc=raeburn@raeburn.org \
--cc=tom@tromey.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this external index
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs.git
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs/org-mode.git
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.