Subject: Re: [boost] [timer] conflict between tools/inspect and libs/timer
From: Peter A. Bigot (pab_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-12-28 11:41:18
On 12/28/2013 08:46 AM, Beman Dawes wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 8:50 AM, Peter Dimov <lists_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> Beman Dawes wrote:
>>> Critical changes on develop dating from February were never merged to
>>> trunk, and I set the git merge point I missed them.
> It turned out the changes were merged into branches/release at the time,
> and setting the merge point backed them out!
>> To avoid such (and other) surprises, what I did was ensure that develop
>> and master are identical before doing the first merge.
>> git diff --name-status master..develop
>> gave me an overview on where the two branches differ; the same command
>> without --name-status goes into more detail.
> I'll add your explanation. I may also move the merge point instructions to
> their own page to make them stand out more.
Setting the merge point is the most critical, and most fragile, step.
From playing with this in Boost.Test there are too many failure modes
to anticipate, so careful review of the content at each step is very
important. I have an annotated script showing the steps I performed in
that case, which might be educational; I'll post it separately after I
>> The first thing I would try is git cherry-pick the missing commits into
> I ended up reverting the entire merge point commit, and then compared
> master and develop to verify.
> (I used TortoiseGit to revert the commit because I wasn't sure how to
> revert a commit from the command line leaving subsequent commits in place.)
I highly recommend "git rebase -i" (interactive rebase) to do this sort
of thing. Interactive rebase allows you to reorder (and remove)
individual commits, squash together commits, and generally clean up the
history of a branch so it's clean before you make it public.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk