(topgit question) deleting a dependency

(topgit question) deleting a dependency

[Sitaram Chamarty]

HI,

[Apologies if this is not the right place to ask; please let
me know if so...]

I know "tg depend" only has the "add" subcommand right now,
but is there a manual way of getting the effect of a
hypothetical "tg depend remove"?

For branches which do not introduce any changes of their
own, can I just "tg delete" the branch and "tg create" it
again with the reduced list of dependencies?  How does this
affect the remote (which would still become a forced push of
some kind).

And is there a way to do this for dependent branches which
*do* have changes of their own?  Even if it is manual and
comes with "here be dragons" warnings :-)

Thanks,

Sitaram

Re: (topgit question) deleting a dependency

[martin f krafft]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 707 bytes --]

also sprach Sitaram Chamarty <sitaramc@gmail.com> [2009.04.28.1049 +0200]:
> [Apologies if this is not the right place to ask; please let
> me know if so...]

It is...

> I know "tg depend" only has the "add" subcommand right now,
> but is there a manual way of getting the effect of a
> hypothetical "tg depend remove"?

No, not yet, see http://bugs.debian.org/505303 for further
discussion on the issue.

-- 
martin | http://madduck.net/ | http://two.sentenc.es/
 
"perfection is achieved, not when there is nothing more to add, but
 when there is nothing left to take away."
                                         -- antoine de saint-exupéry
 
spamtraps: madduck.bogus@madduck.net

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature (see http://martin-krafft.net/gpg/) --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]

Re: (topgit question) deleting a dependency

[Sitaram Chamarty]

On 2009-04-28, martin f krafft <madduck@madduck.net> wrote:

>> I know "tg depend" only has the "add" subcommand right now,
>> but is there a manual way of getting the effect of a
>> hypothetical "tg depend remove"?
>
> No, not yet, see http://bugs.debian.org/505303 for further
> discussion on the issue.

Yes, I'd seen that on a google search, and it made my head
hurt :-)  (My fault, not theirs...!)

I was latching onto the last line of that email: "Maybe in
your case this could be even simpler but this should be the
general process".

My situation _should_ be the simplest.  Every topgit branch
starts off from master, and they're all notionally
independent of each other.  As long as they're here, they're
"cooking", all together, in a branch called t/all.

When one branch is deemed to be cooked, a "tg export" takes
that code to master, and I intend to delete t/all and create
it afresh with the rest of the dependencies (the old set
minus the one that finished cooking).

I was hoping to hear if anyone sees any red flags in that
strategy.

Thanks again,

Sitaram

Re: (topgit question) deleting a dependency

[martin f krafft]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 731 bytes --]

also sprach Sitaram Chamarty <sitaramc@gmail.com> [2009.04.28.1612 +0200]:
> When one branch is deemed to be cooked, a "tg export" takes
> that code to master, and I intend to delete t/all and create
> it afresh with the rest of the dependencies (the old set
> minus the one that finished cooking).

Are any of the t/* branches ever used by anyone else but you? Are
they published?

-- 
martin | http://madduck.net/ | http://two.sentenc.es/
 
"the search for the perfect martini is a fraud. the perfect martini
 is a belt of gin from the bottle; anything else is the decadent
 trappings of civilization."
                                                            -- t. k.
 
spamtraps: madduck.bogus@madduck.net

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature (see http://martin-krafft.net/gpg/) --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]

Re: (topgit question) deleting a dependency

[Sitaram Chamarty]

On 2009-04-28, martin f krafft <madduck@madduck.net> wrote:

> also sprach Sitaram Chamarty <sitaramc@gmail.com> [2009.04.28.1612 +0200]:
>> When one branch is deemed to be cooked, a "tg export" takes
>> that code to master, and I intend to delete t/all and create
>> it afresh with the rest of the dependencies (the old set
>> minus the one that finished cooking).
>
> Are any of the t/* branches ever used by anyone else but you? Are
> they published?

No to both questions.  Sorry I should have mentioned that
earlier :-)

Re: (topgit question) deleting a dependency

[Uwe Kleine-König]

Hello Sitaram,

On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 11:41:38AM +0200, martin f krafft wrote:
> also sprach Sitaram Chamarty <sitaramc@gmail.com> [2009.04.28.1049 +0200]:
> [...]
> > I know "tg depend" only has the "add" subcommand right now,
> > but is there a manual way of getting the effect of a
> > hypothetical "tg depend remove"?
> 
> No, not yet, see http://bugs.debian.org/505303 for further
> discussion on the issue.
But note that you might get some problems after doing that.  See

	http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/116193/focus=116205

for some more details.

Best regards
Uwe

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                              | Uwe Kleine-König            |
Industrial Linux Solutions                    | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |

Re: (topgit question) deleting a dependency

[Sitaram Chamarty]

On 2009-04-28, Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de> wrote:

> On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 11:41:38AM +0200, martin f krafft wrote:
>> also sprach Sitaram Chamarty <sitaramc@gmail.com> [2009.04.28.1049 +0200]:
>> [...]
>> > I know "tg depend" only has the "add" subcommand right now,
>> > but is there a manual way of getting the effect of a
>> > hypothetical "tg depend remove"?
>> 
>> No, not yet, see http://bugs.debian.org/505303 for further
>> discussion on the issue.
> But note that you might get some problems after doing that.  See
>
> 	http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/116193/focus=116205

Hello Uwe,

This is a little beyond my comprehension :(  However, this
is also why I am limiting myself to

  - a single level of dependencies in tg, (master -->
    multiple t/something --> t/all), and

  - no changes of its own in t/all

When any of the t/something graduates to master, t/all will
be blown away (safe, since it has no changes of its own) and
a new t/all created with the new set of dependencies.

I'm pretty sure this will work -- you could say I'm using tg
to automate the "throw-away merge" work flow.

Thanks,

Sitaram

Re: (topgit question) deleting a dependency

[Uwe Kleine-König]

Hello Sitaram,

[mmh, your mail didn't have me in the addressees, wonder why.]

On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 12:52:54AM +0000, Sitaram Chamarty wrote:
> On 2009-04-28, Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de> wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 11:41:38AM +0200, martin f krafft wrote:
> >> also sprach Sitaram Chamarty <sitaramc@gmail.com> [2009.04.28.1049 +0200]:
> >> [...]
> >> > I know "tg depend" only has the "add" subcommand right now,
> >> > but is there a manual way of getting the effect of a
> >> > hypothetical "tg depend remove"?
> >> 
> >> No, not yet, see http://bugs.debian.org/505303 for further
> >> discussion on the issue.
> > But note that you might get some problems after doing that.  See
> >
> > 	http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/116193/focus=116205
> 
> Hello Uwe,
> 
> This is a little beyond my comprehension :(  However, this
> is also why I am limiting myself to
> 
>   - a single level of dependencies in tg, (master -->
>     multiple t/something --> t/all), and
> 
>   - no changes of its own in t/all
> 
> When any of the t/something graduates to master, t/all will
> be blown away (safe, since it has no changes of its own) and
What makes you think it will "be blown away"?  Or alternatively, what do
you mean saying that?  I often use the same approach and I never had the
feeling anything is blown away.  If upstream uses your t/something patch
it just merges into t/something making it empty without changing the
corresponding tree (assuming master contains no other changes).  Then
when t/something is merged into t/all nothing happens, because
t/something's tree didn't change.

So the only thing is that t/all depends on an empty tg-branch.

Best regards
Uwe

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                              | Uwe Kleine-König            |
Industrial Linux Solutions                    | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |

Re: (topgit question) deleting a dependency

[Sitaram Chamarty]

On 2009-04-29, Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de> wrote:
> Hello Sitaram,
>
> [mmh, your mail didn't have me in the addressees, wonder why.]

Sorry - I'm using gmane over slrn (NNTP) from a work server!
Slrn splits the "nntp post" and sends it to gmane, which is
quite happy to post on behalf of sitaramc@gmail.com (my
personal address) but slrn then tries to deliver the "cc"
part using my local (work) mailer, with my work email
address as the "From".  I'm explicitly cc-ing you now, so to
you the email will appear to come from my work address.
Sorry about that!

>> This is a little beyond my comprehension :(  However, this
>> is also why I am limiting myself to
>> 
>>   - a single level of dependencies in tg, (master -->
>>     multiple t/something --> t/all), and
>> 
>>   - no changes of its own in t/all
>> 
>> When any of the t/something graduates to master, t/all will
>> be blown away (safe, since it has no changes of its own) and

> What makes you think it will "be blown away"?  Or alternatively, what do

My mistake.  I meant that I will blow it away myself, and
create a new one with the same name except it's list of deps
will exclude the one that graduated.

> you mean saying that?  I often use the same approach and I never had the
> feeling anything is blown away.  If upstream uses your t/something patch
> it just merges into t/something making it empty without changing the

How?  When I update master from upstream and then tg update
on t/all?

> corresponding tree (assuming master contains no other changes).  Then
> when t/something is merged into t/all nothing happens, because
> t/something's tree didn't change.
>
> So the only thing is that t/all depends on an empty tg-branch.

Regards,

Sitaram

Re: (topgit question) deleting a dependency

[Uwe Kleine-König]

Hello,

> >> This is a little beyond my comprehension :(  However, this
> >> is also why I am limiting myself to
> >> 
> >>   - a single level of dependencies in tg, (master -->
> >>     multiple t/something --> t/all), and
> >> 
> >>   - no changes of its own in t/all
> >> 
> >> When any of the t/something graduates to master, t/all will
> >> be blown away (safe, since it has no changes of its own) and
> 
> > What makes you think it will "be blown away"?  Or alternatively, what do
> 
> My mistake.  I meant that I will blow it away myself, and
> create a new one with the same name except it's list of deps
> will exclude the one that graduated.
> 
> > you mean saying that?  I often use the same approach and I never had the
> > feeling anything is blown away.  If upstream uses your t/something patch
> > it just merges into t/something making it empty without changing the
> 
> How?  When I update master from upstream and then tg update
> on t/all?
yes.  I think it's even save to just remove empty dependencies (and add
the dependencies of the patch branch to be deleted) from .topdeps.

Best regards
Uwe

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                              | Uwe Kleine-König            |
Industrial Linux Solutions                    | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |