librelist archives

« back to archive

The Great Merge

The Great Merge

From:
Steve Klabnik
Date:
2010-06-27 @ 20:42
Okay everyone, either Seth or Mental added me onto shoes/shoes, so I've just
merged my changes in. I also merged in a few changes that looked good, as
well as ignored some of mine that were stupid.

So, my real question is: Are there any changes that anybody's made that
_shouldn't_ be merged in?

A quick summary of the fork queue:

Cecil, you've got a bunch of stuff from back in march and April. Is all that
stuff good?

i5m, how's your stuff looking? Bunch of packaging/download stuff, a shy
handler fix...

I've got one commit by s3v3n:
http://github.com/s3v3n/shoes/commit/722a2933ea0feffd7928a329d595bdd528bfd7f6I
don't know anything about this. Thoughts?

impeachgod has two commits from June of last year,

http://github.com/impeachgod/shoes/commit/dbfcb8715cfa502b5998102cfe604bdc2722c6adand

http://github.com/impeachgod/shoes/commit/71d04cd88726023f972df000a6d21e403f2f1e2dI'm
leaning towards ignore, but if anyone wants them in, I'll roll them
in.

Then, finally, ashbb, all of your various changes.

What do you guys think? Please let me know on your own commits, and weigh in
on s3v3n and impeachgod, since I don't think any of them read this list. I
could be wrong.

Re: [shoes] The Great Merge

From:
Cecil Coupe
Date:
2010-07-01 @ 04:10
The Rakefile is incorrect for me (Ubuntu Linux, 9.10, amd64). Line 530
needs uncommenting and 531 should be commented out.  I suspect it's a
shortcut setting that someone needed that need to be moved into wherever
the Linux Config[LDFLAGS] are built in the Rakefile. 

With that change, it compiles and runs (manual, console, my little
script's GUI). I haven't tested in depth so more bugs may be found.

Steve, I appreciate your work to merger all the branches. It's not a
challenge I would take on. Hat Tip to thee!

What's the GIT magic incantation to make my fork at github be replaced
with the consolidated forks. 

--Cecil


On Sun, 2010-06-27 at 16:42 -0400, Steve Klabnik wrote:
> Okay everyone, either Seth or Mental added me onto shoes/shoes, so
> I've just merged my changes in. I also merged in a few changes that
> looked good, as well as ignored some of mine that were stupid.
> 
> 
> So, my real question is: Are there any changes that anybody's made
> that _shouldn't_ be merged in? 
> 
> 
> A quick summary of the fork queue:
> 
> 
> Cecil, you've got a bunch of stuff from back in march and April. Is
> all that stuff good?
> 
> 
> i5m, how's your stuff looking? Bunch of packaging/download stuff, a
> shy handler fix...
> 
> 
> I've got one commit by
> s3v3n: 
http://github.com/s3v3n/shoes/commit/722a2933ea0feffd7928a329d595bdd528bfd7f6
I don't know anything about this. Thoughts?
> 
> 
> impeachgod has two commits from June of last
> year, 
http://github.com/impeachgod/shoes/commit/dbfcb8715cfa502b5998102cfe604bdc2722c6ad
and 
http://github.com/impeachgod/shoes/commit/71d04cd88726023f972df000a6d21e403f2f1e2d
I'm leaning towards ignore, but if anyone wants them in, I'll roll them 
in.
> 
> 
> Then, finally, ashbb, all of your various changes.
> 
> 
> What do you guys think? Please let me know on your own commits, and
> weigh in on s3v3n and impeachgod, since I don't think any of them read
> this list. I could be wrong.

Re: [shoes] The Great Merge

From:
Steve Klabnik
Date:
2010-07-01 @ 14:56
Cecil, Ashbb-

I've just merged that commit into shoes/shoes.

Cecil, assuming you have shoes listed as a remote "git remote add shoes
http://github.com/shoes/shoes", you can 'git fetch shoes' and then 'git
merge shoes/master'. Now, because I didn't pull in all of your changes,
you're likely to get a few conflicts, which you'll have to merge in
manually.

Steve, I appreciate your work to merger all the branches. It's not a
> challenge I would take on. Hat Tip to thee!


No biggie. I don't mind doing something that needs to get done. It'll be
much easier in the future if we merge things in more often.

Re: [shoes] The Great Merge

From:
Cecil Coupe
Date:
2010-07-02 @ 04:13
Well, git and I are not close friends even with your help. If you only
use the tool with ignorance, once or twice a year... I might be doing it
wrong. it might be easier for me to
delete/remove/expunge/blow-up/kiss-off the shoes/ccoupe fork at github
and start anew, assuming I have anything to contribute. 

The latest shoes/shoes/master, or HEAD works fine in
Linux(X64)/Ruby-1.9.1 for my tests. No segfaults, no thread dumps,
nothing unusual in the console window. 

I just have to learn git. Actually, a wiki post for newbies about git,
github and shoes might be a good thing to write. Maybe it's there
already. 

On Thu, 2010-07-01 at 10:56 -0400, Steve Klabnik wrote:
> 
> Cecil, assuming you have shoes listed as a remote "git remote add
> shoes http://github.com/shoes/shoes", you can 'git fetch shoes' and
> then 'git merge shoes/master'. Now, because I didn't pull in all of
> your changes, you're likely to get a few conflicts, which you'll have
> to merge in manually.
> 
> 
>         Steve, I appreciate your work to merger all the branches. It's
>         not a
>         challenge I would take on. Hat Tip to thee!
> 
> 
> No biggie. I don't mind doing something that needs to get done. It'll
> be much easier in the future if we merge things in more often. 

Re: [shoes] The Great Merge

From:
Steve Klabnik
Date:
2010-07-02 @ 14:13
>
> it might be easier for me to
> delete/remove/expunge/blow-up/kiss-off the shoes/ccoupe fork at github
> and start anew, assuming I have anything to contribute.
>

This is possible. *shrug*


> The latest shoes/shoes/master, or HEAD works fine in
> Linux(X64)/Ruby-1.9.1 for my tests. No segfaults, no thread dumps,

nothing unusual in the console window.
>

Awesome. :)


> I just have to learn git. Actually, a wiki post for newbies about git,
> github and shoes might be a good thing to write. Maybe it's there
> already.
>

There isn't one on the Shoes wiki, though I'd be willing to write one...
I've written a git tutorial previously for my OS project, see here:
http://wiki.xomb.org/index.php?title=Git#Using_Git

But a smaller/simpler one might be nice, yeah. Also, progit.org is a _great_
resource for git learning...

Re: [shoes] The Great Merge

From:
Cecil Coupe
Date:
2010-07-03 @ 04:47
On Fri, 2010-07-02 at 10:13 -0400, Steve Klabnik wrote:
>         it might be easier for me to
>         delete/remove/expunge/blow-up/kiss-off the shoes/ccoupe fork
>         at github
>         and start anew, assuming I have anything to contribute.
> 
> 
> This is possible. *shrug*
>  
I don't like giving up either. Delete and reinstall is the lazy way of
problem solving. Yet, I seem to be in a rabbit hole of git that won't
update my local repository or my remote branch with the new head.
>  
>         I just have to learn git. Actually, a wiki post for newbies
>         about git,
>         github and shoes might be a good thing to write. Maybe it's
>         there
>         already.
> 
> 
> There isn't one on the Shoes wiki, though I'd be willing to write
> one... 
> But a smaller/simpler one might be nice, yeah.
Particularly if it used Shoes relevant name/terms rather that a git
lesson in general. Here is how to fork shoes and send updates. Here is
how to pull in updates from another contributer's branch. Here is how 
> Also, progit.org is a _great_ resource for git learning...


Re: [shoes] The Great Merge

From:
Devyn Cairns
Date:
2010-07-03 @ 06:20
On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 9:47 PM, Cecil Coupe <ccoupe@cableone.net> wrote:

> On Fri, 2010-07-02 at 10:13 -0400, Steve Klabnik wrote:
> >         it might be easier for me to
> >         delete/remove/expunge/blow-up/kiss-off the shoes/ccoupe fork
> >         at github
> >         and start anew, assuming I have anything to contribute.
> >
> >
> > This is possible. *shrug*
> >
> I don't like giving up either. Delete and reinstall is the lazy way of
> problem solving. Yet, I seem to be in a rabbit hole of git that won't
> update my local repository or my remote branch with the new head.
>

I'm can't remember now, but I'm positive there's a way to create a
completely blank branch (as in, no history, just completely clean) and make
it track any remote.


> >
> >         I just have to learn git. Actually, a wiki post for newbies
> >         about git,
> >         github and shoes might be a good thing to write. Maybe it's
> >         there
> >         already.
> >
> >
> > There isn't one on the Shoes wiki, though I'd be willing to write
> > one...
> > But a smaller/simpler one might be nice, yeah.
> Particularly if it used Shoes relevant name/terms rather that a git
> lesson in general. Here is how to fork shoes and send updates. Here is
> how to pull in updates from another contributer's branch. Here is how
> > Also, progit.org is a _great_ resource for git learning...
>
>
>
>


-- 
   ~devyn

Re: [shoes] The Great Merge

From:
ashbb
Date:
2010-07-01 @ 12:46
Hi Cecil,

Sorry, that is my fault. I mistook to merge by hand.
Now corrected and sent pull request.
So, please confirm again when that will be pulled in shoes/shoes.

Commit is here:
http://github.com/ashbb/shoes/commit/7cf6603c92e7178f62dedf01cad356e84e5448ad

ashbb

Re: [shoes] The Great Merge

From:
i5m
Date:
2010-06-28 @ 15:04
Off the top of my head, I think anything worthwhile I've done has been
picked up by ashbb. Other stuff is OSX PPC specific, which I'll just keep in
my own branch. But I will have a look through and get back to you.
-----------------------
i5m.co.uk
GPG Key: 0xA18A602B


On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 9:42 PM, Steve Klabnik <steve@steveklabnik.com>wrote:

>
> i5m, how's your stuff looking? Bunch of packaging/download stuff, a shy
> handler fix...
>
>
>

Re: [shoes] The Great Merge

From:
i5m
Date:
2010-07-06 @ 14:50
Steve,

On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 4:04 PM, i5m <i5ivem@gmail.com> wrote:

>   But I will have a look through and get back to you.
>


as far as I can tell, this is the only thing that hasn't been merged in: Fix
alignment of 
edit_lines<http://github.com/i5m/shoes/commit/50e64a6a44cc1b8b8dad40599919f74c819423fd>.
It relates to Issue 5 <http://github.com/shoes/shoes/issues/closed#issue/5>,
which andhapp closed out.

Note: I never verified whether there were any detrimental effects of this
commit.

-----------------------
i5m.co.uk
GPG Key: 0xA18A602B

Re: [shoes] The Great Merge

From:
Steve Klabnik
Date:
2010-07-06 @ 14:53
Cool, thanks! I'll test it out and merge it in.

On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 10:50 AM, i5m <i5ivem@gmail.com> wrote:

> Steve,
>
> On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 4:04 PM, i5m <i5ivem@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>   But I will have a look through and get back to you.
>>
>
>
> as far as I can tell, this is the only thing that hasn't been merged in: Fix
> alignment of 
edit_lines<http://github.com/i5m/shoes/commit/50e64a6a44cc1b8b8dad40599919f74c819423fd>.
> It relates to Issue 5<http://github.com/shoes/shoes/issues/closed#issue/5>,
> which andhapp closed out.
>
> Note: I never verified whether there were any detrimental effects of this
> commit.
>
> -----------------------
> i5m.co.uk
> GPG Key: 0xA18A602B
>

Re: [shoes] The Great Merge

From:
Cecil Coupe
Date:
2010-06-27 @ 21:23
On Sun, 2010-06-27 at 16:42 -0400, Steve Klabnik wrote:
> 
> I've got one commit by
> s3v3n: 
http://github.com/s3v3n/shoes/commit/722a2933ea0feffd7928a329d595bdd528bfd7f6
I don't know anything about this. Thoughts? 
> 

If I understand it correctly, it's a nice feature. It needs (should
have) the OSX equivalent mods.

Re: [shoes] The Great Merge

From:
Devyn Cairns
Date:
2010-06-27 @ 21:20
On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 1:42 PM, Steve Klabnik <steve@steveklabnik.com>wrote:

> Okay everyone, either Seth or Mental added me onto shoes/shoes, so I've
> just merged my changes in. I also merged in a few changes that looked good,
> as well as ignored some of mine that were stupid.
>
> So, my real question is: Are there any changes that anybody's made that
> _shouldn't_ be merged in?
>
> A quick summary of the fork queue:
>
> Cecil, you've got a bunch of stuff from back in march and April. Is all
> that stuff good?
>
> i5m, how's your stuff looking? Bunch of packaging/download stuff, a shy
> handler fix...
>
> I've got one commit by s3v3n:
> 
http://github.com/s3v3n/shoes/commit/722a2933ea0feffd7928a329d595bdd528bfd7f6I
don't know anything about this. Thoughts?
>

Looks like a well-formed commit to me. The code looks fine, too. It's a
minor thing, so you can probably add it without any issues. I vote yes.


>
> impeachgod has two commits from June of last year,
> 
http://github.com/impeachgod/shoes/commit/dbfcb8715cfa502b5998102cfe604bdc2722c6adand
> 
http://github.com/impeachgod/shoes/commit/71d04cd88726023f972df000a6d21e403f2f1e2dI'm
leaning towards ignore, but if anyone wants them in, I'll roll them in.
>
> Then, finally, ashbb, all of your various changes.
>
> What do you guys think? Please let me know on your own commits, and weigh
> in on s3v3n and impeachgod, since I don't think any of them read this list.
> I could be wrong.
>



-- 
   ~devyn

Re: [shoes] The Great Merge

From:
Cecil Coupe
Date:
2010-06-27 @ 21:09
On Sun, 2010-06-27 at 16:42 -0400, Steve Klabnik wrote:

> 
> Cecil, you've got a bunch of stuff from back in march and April. Is
> all that stuff good?

I believe ashbb's fork has all my mods (or their equivalents). Might be
easier to merge all your OSX changes to that base.