Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Alternate bad merge fix #2251

Merged
merged 3 commits into from Jan 9, 2023
Merged

Conversation

jepler
Copy link
Member

@jepler jepler commented Jan 7, 2023

Hi.

I wanted to make a different attempt at fixing the merge problem introduced at 1d836df as a check on @SebKuzminsky's work (thanks @SebKuzminsky)

Here's what I did:

  • Start a new branch at 1d836df^, the commit before the problematic one
  • Merge origin/2.9 into this commit. For each doc conflict (there were conflicts in 4 files), take the one that looks "more semantic" in its line breaking
  • Attempt to cherry-pick each non-merge commit after 1d836df (only one generated a non-empty commit)
  • "git merge -s origin/master" to subsume the 'other side of history' without taking its changes (ironic, I know)

Here are the differences from seb's patch (- side) to my patch (+ side): https://gist.github.com/a3f9e75449b23a3817d91f4fdd83244f

As far as I can tell the differences do not touch any functionality, only documentation and some help text.

Probably the differences arise because Seb skipped merging commits that touched docs and caused conflicts, while I resolved the conflicts (albeit somewhat arbitrarily).

@SebKuzminsky
Copy link
Collaborator

This seems like a better solution than #2250.

@jepler jepler merged commit ceeabdf into LinuxCNC:master Jan 9, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants