Re: Merging frustration when tracking external projects
Rick Smith <[email protected]> Sun, 19 Dec 2004 06:30:54 -0800
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.version-control.bitkeeper.user |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Hi, The problem which you identified, is to how to take advantage of a merge resolution which occured in another repo for some current merge. A way is as you described: to allow for multiple pulls or pull from multiple sources to occur before doing a resolve. > Is there any way to accomplish this, or am I just doing something > terribly wrong here? The math in BK that makes converging easy works against you when keeping B and C separate in the data flow you outlines. The solutions have to do with doing some merge again -- such as having D be a throw away version, and bring B and C together each time. Since you control B and C, they might be structured to merge automatically. Rick On Sat, Dec 18, 2004 at 11:39:25PM -0700, Kevin P. Fleming wrote: > Here is my repo structure: > > A - tracks the external project > B - is a clone of A, with local changes > C - is a clone of A, with other (unrelated) local changes > D - is a clone of A, with both B and C pulled into it (merge tree) > > Now, when I pull in another batch of updates from the external project, > I do this: > > 1) Generate a diff between the external tree and A. > 2) 'bk import -tpatch' that diff into A > 3) 'bk pull' A into B, and resolve conflicts > 4) 'bk pull' A into C, and resolve conflicts > > So far so good, everything works as expected. However, tonight there > were conflicts in both B and C that had to be manually resolved. Once I > did those... > > 5) 'bk pull' B (or C) into D > > This fails miserably. If I pull B into D, I'll have to manually resolve > C's conflicts again; if I pull C into D, the reverse will happen. What I > need to be able to do is tell BitKeeper to either: > > - pull B _AND_ C into D > > or > > - pull B into D, without running resolve or applying the changes, then > pull C into D, and resolve all changes in a single batch > > Is there any way to accomplish this, or am I just doing something > terribly wrong here? Obviously I could generate a patch from B and one > from C and import those into D, but I'd rather not, since BitKeeper > should be able to handle this with the information it has available to it. > _______________________________________________ > Bitkeeper-users mailing list > [email protected] > http://bitmover.com/mailman/listinfo/bitkeeper-users > To unsubscribe from this list, go to the above URL, follow instruction at > the bottom of the web page. _______________________________________________ Bitkeeper-users mailing list [email protected] http://bitmover.com/mailman/listinfo/bitkeeper-users To unsubscribe from this list, go to the above URL, follow instruction at the bottom of the web page.