Am Samstag, 24. Januar 2015, 22:42:44 schrieb René J.V. Bertin: > On Saturday January 24 2015 19:28:48 Jaroslaw Staniek wrote: > > Yep, that was not a big oops. Especially that, René, you're doing a great > > work! > <blush> > > I think that in the end only the history was messed up a bit, right? I did a > complete new checkout "the morning after", and found it equal to my working > copy of the 2.9 branch, and to contain all the changes that were made just > before my clumsy commit. So unless I really don't understand git, I think > nothing was lost, right?
Right. Seems all fine to me as well. IMHO what has happened was that you had a local commit 36f11036e6e5d8ff3a93676e2157083bbf8331c4 added to your local copy of the calligra/2.9 branch, when at the same time others pushed more commits to the central calligra/2.9 branch. And then did a "git pull", this resulted in your local modified branch being merged into the updated version of the branch as fetched from the central calligra/2.9 branch. So similar to as if you created a branch, added a commit to it, while others added commits to the main branch, and then you merge it back. So always do "git pull --rebase" if you have locally commits added which are not synced yet. Or go explocit and just "git fetch" and then "git merge --ff-only origin/branch", that will fail if your copy of the branch has conflicting commits. More details at http://git-scm.com/docs/git-pull :) And yes, for a easy to look-at history merges should be avoided, so this was a small ooops ;) But no real harm done, can and does happen once in a while to everyone. Cheers Friedrich _______________________________________________ calligra-devel mailing list calligra-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/calligra-devel
