Re: [Numpy-discussion] Another merge at github

2010-10-18 Thread Pauli Virtanen
Mon, 18 Oct 2010 12:20:00 +0300, Pearu Peterson wrote: [clip] > I see that there are long discussions in numpy ml about the git usage > and mis usage. I wonder whether this has converged to something that > could be used as reference for git beginners like me. I think there's agreement on what we

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Another merge at github

2010-10-18 Thread Hoyt Koepke
FYI for general readers, I found the following discussion on this topic really helpful: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/457927/git-workflow-and-rebase-vs-merge-questions --Hoyt + Hoyt Koepke + University of Washington Department of Statistics

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Another merge at github

2010-10-18 Thread Pearu Peterson
On 10/16/2010 09:53 PM, Charles R Harris wrote: > Here > . > This looks harmless but it makes the history really ugly. We need to get > the word out *not* to do things this way. Sorry, that was me and my git ignorance

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Another merge at github

2010-10-18 Thread Pearu Peterson
On 10/16/2010 09:53 PM, Charles R Harris wrote: > Here > . > This looks harmless but it makes the history really ugly. We need to get > the word out *not* to do things this way. Sorry, that was me and my git ignorance

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Another merge at github

2010-10-18 Thread Pauli Virtanen
Sat, 16 Oct 2010 23:23:46 -0600, Charles R Harris wrote: [clip] > And I just managed the same result on a push to maintenance/1.5.x :-/ > But I know how it happened, I cherry picked from master for a backport > before updating the 1.5.x branch from github. In Retrospect I probably > should have res

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Another merge at github

2010-10-17 Thread Charles R Harris
On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 4:23 PM, Charles R Harris wrote: > > > On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 3:54 PM, Benjamin Root wrote: > >> On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 2:20 PM, Charles R Harris < >> charlesr.har...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 12:56 PM, Joshua Holbrook < >>> josh.holbr...@

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Another merge at github

2010-10-17 Thread Ralf Gommers
2010/10/17 Stéfan van der Walt : > On Sun, Oct 17, 2010 at 12:23 AM, Charles R Harris > wrote: >> >> IIRC, they recommended pushing from local branches to master on github and >> not merging master to the development branches. That doesn't sound right to >> me, but perhaps I misunderstood... > > T

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Another merge at github

2010-10-17 Thread Ralf Gommers
On Sun, Oct 17, 2010 at 1:48 PM, Ralf Gommers wrote: > 2010/10/17 Stéfan van der Walt : >> On Sun, Oct 17, 2010 at 12:23 AM, Charles R Harris >> wrote: >>> >>> IIRC, they recommended pushing from local branches to master on github and >>> not merging master to the development branches. That doesn

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Another merge at github

2010-10-16 Thread Fernando Perez
2010/10/16 Stéfan van der Walt : > The idea is not to keep merging the master branch into your > development branch to keep up to date (this makes for really ugly > history). > > For single commits, merge back into master (hopefully this should be a > fast-forward merge), which then creates an svn-

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Another merge at github

2010-10-16 Thread Stéfan van der Walt
On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 11:54 PM, Benjamin Root wrote: > I think the iPython development mailing list recently had a long discussion > about proper git usage.  Maybe there is something we can learn from their > experience? Here's the link again: http://mail.scipy.org/pipermail/ipython-dev/2010-O

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Another merge at github

2010-10-16 Thread Stéfan van der Walt
On Sun, Oct 17, 2010 at 12:23 AM, Charles R Harris wrote: > > IIRC, they recommended pushing from local branches to master on github and > not merging master to the development branches. That doesn't sound right to > me, but perhaps I misunderstood... The idea is not to keep merging the master br

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Another merge at github

2010-10-16 Thread Charles R Harris
On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 3:54 PM, Benjamin Root wrote: > On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 2:20 PM, Charles R Harris < > charlesr.har...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> >> On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 12:56 PM, Joshua Holbrook < >> josh.holbr...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 10:53 AM, Charles R Harr

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Another merge at github

2010-10-16 Thread Benjamin Root
On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 2:20 PM, Charles R Harris wrote: > > > On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 12:56 PM, Joshua Holbrook > wrote: > >> On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 10:53 AM, Charles R Harris >> wrote: >> > Here. This looks harmless but it makes the history really ugly. We need >> to >> > get the word out *n

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Another merge at github

2010-10-16 Thread Charles R Harris
On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 12:56 PM, Joshua Holbrook wrote: > On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 10:53 AM, Charles R Harris > wrote: > > Here. This looks harmless but it makes the history really ugly. We need > to > > get the word out *not* to do things this way. > > > > Chuck > > > > _

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Another merge at github

2010-10-16 Thread Joshua Holbrook
On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 10:53 AM, Charles R Harris wrote: > Here. This looks harmless but it makes the history really ugly. We need to > get the word out *not* to do things this way. > > Chuck > > ___ > NumPy-Discussion mailing list > NumPy-Discussion@sc

[Numpy-discussion] Another merge at github

2010-10-16 Thread Charles R Harris
Here. This looks harmless but it makes the history really ugly. We need to get the word out *not* to do things this way. Chuck ___ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussi