![]() Tip: useless jargon (it's the last commit that was pushed).pushing: Send your timeline's changes so that everyone else sees them and can pull them.pulling: Grab the other timelines (alternate universes!) that were pushed by everyone else.the "task" approach they're using doesn't seem to help me accomplish any tasks. TortoiseHg feels like it has so many options, pulling, pushing, commit, import, export, tip, working directory. KungFooMasta wrote:Is it possible Mercurial is quite a bit more complex to use compared to SVN? I remember TortoiseSVN being very easy to use for my personal projects. You first have to be using either 'A' or 'B', and select the other one to start the merge. ![]() You can't be using commit C, and select A & B so they get merged as 'D'. Something that saves you a lot of time that wasn't obvious to me: When you want (i.e.) to merge two commits, you have to update to one of the commits, and then select the other commit that will be merged into the current active one. There must be a merge in the middle of your patch. Now, patches usually fail at merges since they can't handle it very well, so that "HUNK failed" is probably that. May look ugly to you at first, but you'll get used to it and at some point wonder how you couldn't live without it (it has a lot of small advantages). Graphically, the log looks like a street that gets split in two and then joins back. Instead, you have to make a third commit: In this commit, both timelines will merge into one, and you'll have the chance of resolving the conflicts. You can try to do this using patches or the rebase extensions. Either Bob's commit should come before yours, or yours should come before Bob's. So that they look like one (and will appear cleaner, more SVN like). Your first instinct will be to collapse both timelines into one. You made one commit, Bob made also one commit. So there are two different timelines: yours and Bob's. you have "multiple timelines" think of them as parallel universes. Additionally, if you're working on a particular feature that isn't ready yet, you can't commit otherwise you'll break everything for everybody. The big disadvantage of this model is that you risk losing your changes if you make a mistake while merging. If there were changes, you may have to merge or even resolve conflicts after the checkout and before the commit. In SVN you're used to have "one timeline" (the history log). Welcome back KungFooMasta! haven't seen you in a while!Īs an old timer SVN user that learned to love Hg after roughly half a year of swearing: Is it possible Mercurial is quite a bit more complex to use compared to SVN? I remember TortoiseSVN being very easy to use for my personal projects. I don't know if this is relevant by I previously cloned to D:\Sandbox\Ogre, and now that I needed to fork and work on that, I renamed D:\Sandbox\Ogre to D:\Sandbox\Ogre_Sinbad, and created D:\Sandbox\Ogre and used that to clone my forked repository. It doesn't tell me whay these hunks have failed. Patching file RenderSystems/Direct3D11/src/OgreD3D11VideoModeList.cppġ out of 1 hunks FAILED - saving rejects to file RenderSystems/Direct3D11/src/ Patching file OgreMain/src/WIN32/OgreErrorDialogWinRT.cppġ out of 1 hunks FAILED - saving rejects to file OgreMain/src/WIN32/ % hg import -verbose - "D:\Sandbox\Ogre\6286.patch" ![]() Only then can you safely push your changes.Īdditionally, pay attention to that guide. Therefore, always pull in the latest changes into your local repository and execute a merge between those and your local changes (this automatic pull before push can also be configured in same GUI versions, such TortoiseHg). Additionally, as Hg is telling you, you would create a second head which always has to be avoided. Afterwards, you can create the pull-requests from your remote fork to the official code base on BitBucket directly.įrom the sound of it, you are currently trying to directly change the code inside the official repository ( ), for which you most likely do not have authorization. So you first need to create your own fork of the Ogre3D repository on BitBucket, implement your changes in your local fork clone and then push them to the remote one. V2-0: The planned major revision with many API-breaking changes and huge performance increase thanks to heavy optimization and redesign V1-9: The currently stable and released Ogre versionĭefault: The current bleeding edge = development version (the future v1-10)
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |