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

MRG: pull in discarded changes from maintenance #808

Merged
merged 3 commits into from Dec 14, 2015

Conversation

Projects
None yet
3 participants
@matthew-brett
Member

matthew-brett commented Dec 13, 2015

I was puzzled to see that current master doesn't have the Tripwire fixes
Ariel did on the maintenance branch.

After a bit of debugging, I think what happened is you (Ariel) did a git merge -s ours on the maintenance branch, at merge commit 6d31467 . This has
the effect of marking that part of the maintenance history as known, but
throwing away the changes from the maintenance branch. It's the right thing to
do if you are making changes you don't want in mainline, but the wrong thing
to do if you do want the changes.

I don't know how to undo that in a nice way, so I just cherry-picked back the
relevant commits.

matthew-brett and others added some commits Dec 4, 2015

@arokem

This comment has been minimized.

Member

arokem commented Dec 14, 2015

Huh. I thought this would pull anything except for things that cause merge conflicts. Thanks for catching this...

arokem added a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 14, 2015

Merge pull request #808 from matthew-brett/revert-bad-maint-merge
MRG: pull in discarded changes from maintenance

@arokem arokem merged commit 5ee43e6 into nipy:master Dec 14, 2015

1 check passed

continuous-integration/travis-ci/pr The Travis CI build passed
Details
@dimrozakis

This comment has been minimized.

Contributor

dimrozakis commented Dec 14, 2015

@arokem git merge -s ours uses the ours merging strategy that ignores any changes in all branches except the current head. What you wanted is probably git merge -X ours which uses the default recursive strategy with the ours option, that keeps changes from all branches and favors the current head in case of conflict between branches.

@arokem

This comment has been minimized.

Member

arokem commented Dec 15, 2015

Ah! Thanks @dimrozakis! Clearly this is not something I do every day...

@arokem arokem referenced this pull request Dec 16, 2015

Merged

Relax regression tests #806

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment