Summary of an unwanted merge and what I did

Summary of an unwanted merge and what I did

[Holger Freyther]

Hey,

I love countries where they block the SMTP port and somehow even if I did sent 
two mails on this.

So here my summary:
	I had both Openembedded and Openmoko in the same database and innocently 
typed mtn merge, got annoyed with the ncc on gsmhandset.state files, 
completed the merge, pushed. I only had a look at the last rev of the two 
heads and it was a DEPENDS fixlet to neod which looked about right, so 
decided to do the merge. Only afterwards I saw I just merged the qtopia-phone 
crap.


So what did I learn about mtn:
	- You can not disapprove a merge!
	- So I decided to suspend the merge, the ncc preparation and the head of OM. 
This lead to a tree without any heads. :)
	- Then I used the last not OM head I had (one ancestor of the merge) and did 
a change and created a new head.


I assumed this situation was fixed, we have OM history in the OE.db which is 
not bad, but still the Qtopia phone recipes are not within OE. Everything 
looked fine until I got poked on irc.

It looks like someone is using a mtn without the support for the suspend cert, 
and he did the merge again.

I could suspend the merge, create a new head without the merge but then 
someone without a mtn with the suspend cert support will do a merge... and I 
could suspend the merge, create a new head wihtout the merge but then someone 
without a mtn with the suspend will do a merge... I love infinite recursion.

I have no idea how to fix this situation without ditching monotone. E.g. If 
mtn would transfer the client version number and we could reject this with a 
lua hook we would be set, but I don't remember seing such thing.


ideas? I'm tempted to say sorry but I think I'm not the one to blame (a tool 
is) :)

	z.

Re: Summary of an unwanted merge and what I did

[Holger Freyther]

On Monday 28 April 2008 13:44:32 Holger Freyther wrote:
> Hey,

> ideas? I'm tempted to say sorry but I think I'm not the one to blame (a
> tool is) :)

I went with a "mtn diff -r merge -r good head | 
patch -p0 -R --remove-empty-files; mtn drop --missing; mtn ci" and ask 
everyone helping to fix the fallout, e.g., this removed new versions of 
gnash, multitab-pad and other things, don't blame me.


mtn disapprove and mtn suspend are pretty cool concepts but they come with 
shortcomings I don't see fixed within the next year or two:

	- mtn disapprove does not work on merges
	- mtn suspend and other certs only work with if all people on this planet 
have a mtn >= the introduction of this cert. Some sort of flag day (talks are 
ongoing on this) or some sort of semantic to don't use this rev if you don't 
understand the 'systems' certs is needed.

I don't think these issues, a working graphical front end, new features are 
getting finished within a year or two and instead of entering the SCM 
development I would prefer to go with the best one.

it is about time to switch and I'm tempted to say to not contribute to OE as 
long as we use mtn, I'm not sure on this though. I will make up my mind on 
it.

z.

Re: Summary of an unwanted merge and what I did

[Rolf Leggewie]

Holger Freyther wrote:
> it is about time to switch

I believe the discussion has been done.  I agree, action should follow.
 What are the next steps?  Do we want a vote on which tool to use?  I
see three contenders.

 a) stick with mtn
 b) switch to hg
 c) switch git

I don't recollect anybody advocating anything else.  So, should we have
a vote on a, b, or is there some technical issue that needs to resolved
or evaluated first?

Re: Summary of an unwanted merge and what I did

[Khem Raj]

hg or git is "egal" for me.

On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 4:43 PM, Rolf Leggewie
<no2spam@nospam.arcornews.de> wrote:
> Holger Freyther wrote:
> > it is about time to switch
>
> I believe the discussion has been done.  I agree, action should follow.
>  What are the next steps?  Do we want a vote on which tool to use?  I
> see three contenders.
>
>  a) stick with mtn
>  b) switch to hg
>  c) switch git
>
> I don't recollect anybody advocating anything else.  So, should we have
> a vote on a, b, or is there some technical issue that needs to resolved
> or evaluated first?
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Openembedded-devel mailing list
> Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
> http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
>

Re: Summary of an unwanted merge and what I did

[Richard Purdie]

On Tue, 2008-04-29 at 01:43 +0200, Rolf Leggewie wrote:
> Holger Freyther wrote:
> > it is about time to switch
> 
> I believe the discussion has been done.  I agree, action should follow.
>  What are the next steps?  Do we want a vote on which tool to use?  I
> see three contenders.
> 
>  a) stick with mtn
>  b) switch to hg
>  c) switch git
> 
> I don't recollect anybody advocating anything else.  So, should we have
> a vote on a, b, or is there some technical issue that needs to resolved
> or evaluated first?

The 'core' team discussed it and didn't reach a consensus. I'm planning
to setup a git trial server, the problem is I want to do it properly and
to me this includes reuniting us with our lost history from bitkeeper.

Setting up a git server isn't a problem and I'm halfway there with that
already. The are two main issues. One is I have been trying to convert
the bitkeeper cvs into something sane. If anyone does have some time to
experiment and wants to have a go with that let me know and I can detail
where I'm up to with it and what the problems are. It is possible to add
in the history using tree grafts afterwards but I'd prefer not to do
that if we can help it.

The second issue is one of enabling 'proper' access control. Even with
monotone we don't have something foolproof. With git I've ideas about
how we can do this but until we have a tree setup I can't really test
them.

I have been trying to get this sorted for a while and various things
have ended up taking priority which is frustrating for all, me included.
I will try and get this sorted soon...

Cheers,

Richard

Re: Summary of an unwanted merge and what I did

[Rolf Leggewie]

Thanks, Richard, for the update.

Richard Purdie wrote:
> The 'core' team discussed it and didn't reach a consensus.

You mean a unanimous vote?  Or was there really wide disagreement?

Re: Summary of an unwanted merge and what I did

[Philip Balister]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1034 bytes --]

There are lots of good feature and bad features to all the choices. What 
it boils down to is many people want to use git because everyone else 
does (I fall into the category), but git is a pain in the hind-quarters 
to learn (I also fall into this category, ask me about git revert 
sometime). Hg is the closest replacement for monotone, but it suffers 
from a small (but expanding) user base. Then there are "technical" 
reasons that I'll skip :)

Then there is the school of thought that we should just make everyone 
unhappy and use Visual Source Safe or ClearCase.

Philip

Rolf Leggewie wrote:
> Thanks, Richard, for the update.
> 
> Richard Purdie wrote:
>> The 'core' team discussed it and didn't reach a consensus.
> 
> You mean a unanimous vote?  Or was there really wide disagreement?
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Openembedded-devel mailing list
> Openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org
> http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
> 

[-- Attachment #2: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature --]
[-- Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature, Size: 3303 bytes --]

Re: Summary of an unwanted merge and what I did

[Leon Woestenberg]

Hello,

On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 2:06 PM, Philip Balister <philip@balister.org> wrote:
>
>  Then there is the school of thought that we should just make everyone
> unhappy and use Visual Source Safe or ClearCase.
>

And then, the vice versa approach:

Did we reach agreement that the move to GIT or Hg will make us happy,
regardless of which one?

Regards,
-- 
Leon

Re: Summary of an unwanted merge and what I did

[Michael 'Mickey' Lauer]

On Tuesday 29 April 2008 15:43:32 Leon Woestenberg wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 2:06 PM, Philip Balister <philip@balister.org> 
wrote:
> >  Then there is the school of thought that we should just make everyone
> > unhappy and use Visual Source Safe or ClearCase.
>
> And then, the vice versa approach:
>
> Did we reach agreement that the move to GIT or Hg will make us happy,
> regardless of which one?

At the risk of being flamed, I will step forward and say:

Yes. I'm seeing an overwhelming majority supporting a move to git or hg, with 
a strong tend towards git. At the moment, we are working on test 
installations to see how that would fit into our workflow.

The days of us solely using monotone are counted. As opposed to last time 
though, this time we do and will not rush it.

:M:
-- 
Dr. Michael 'Mickey' Lauer | IT-Freelancer | http://www.vanille-media.de

Re: Summary of an unwanted merge and what I did

[Justin Patrin]

On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 6:54 AM, Michael 'Mickey' Lauer
<mickey@vanille-media.de> wrote:
> On Tuesday 29 April 2008 15:43:32 Leon Woestenberg wrote:
>  > On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 2:06 PM, Philip Balister <philip@balister.org>
>  wrote:
>  > >  Then there is the school of thought that we should just make everyone
>  > > unhappy and use Visual Source Safe or ClearCase.
>  >
>  > And then, the vice versa approach:
>  >
>  > Did we reach agreement that the move to GIT or Hg will make us happy,
>  > regardless of which one?
>
>  At the risk of being flamed, I will step forward and say:
>
>  Yes. I'm seeing an overwhelming majority supporting a move to git or hg, with
>  a strong tend towards git. At the moment, we are working on test
>  installations to see how that would fit into our workflow.
>
>  The days of us solely using monotone are counted. As opposed to last time
>  though, this time we do and will not rush it.
>

At the risk of being flamed myself I'll ask what many aeem to assume
to be obvious: What does git or hg give OE over monotone? Admittedly
the annoyance of the OP is genuine but that a new feature doesn't
quite work as expected doesn't seem like a reason to switch to me.

-- 
Justin Patrin

Re: Summary of an unwanted merge and what I did

[Tim Bird]

Justin Patrin wrote:
> At the risk of being flamed myself I'll ask what many seem to assume
> to be obvious: What does git or hg give OE over monotone? Admittedly
> the annoyance of the OP is genuine but that a new feature doesn't
> quite work as expected doesn't seem like a reason to switch to me.

In order to avoid a re-hash of a rather long discussion, please
read the thread starting here:
http://projects.linuxtogo.org/pipermail/openembedded-devel/2008-March/004642.html

=============================
Tim Bird
Architecture Group Chair, CE Linux Forum
Senior Staff Engineer, Sony Corporation of America
=============================