Something really weird just happened with update/merge
(1.3) By Stephan Beal (stephan) on 2020-08-16 16:22:03 edited from 1.2 [link] [source]
i have no idea what just happened here with update and merging, but here's what my bash history and fallible short-term memory tells me...
(@Andy Goth: please read this! i may have crossed the streams with you!)
The trunk, as of this writing, looks like:
What led to that, as best as i can reconstruct it:
- i was working on the line-number-section branch, unaware that Richard had merged it for 2.12.
- Tried to commit and got a warning about a closed leaf.
- Updated to trunk but got a conflict.
- Save stash
- Update to trunk
- Apply stash. Expected the conflict but didn't get one.
Tested and checked in.(Edit: nope - happened later.)
- Did not notice that fossil moved me to the "bad-merge" branch, and i have no idea why it did that. i did not do update tip, only an unqualified "update" and "update trunk".
Here's where it gets unclear...
- Tried to committed the first part of my stash.
- It seems, looking at my history, that it failed, i stashed, updated, applied the stash, and committed again. That seems to have resulted in 2 commits: 154f6484 (in the "bad-merge" branch) and 2018954b (trunk).
- Committed 2nd part of my stash (4368f529).
- Looking at the timeline now, it looks like i may well have inadvertently checked in undesired changes from Andy G. from the bad-merge branch.
My current recommendation, but want to discuss it first, is to move:
To a "mistake" branch and i'll re-commit my changes from its parent:
Edit: possibly nevermind. See the first response. It's still really weird, though.
(2) By Stephan Beal (stephan) on 2020-08-16 16:19:52 in reply to 1.0 [link] [source]
Looking at the timeline now, it looks like i may well have inadvertently checked in undesired changes from Andy G. from the bad-merge branch.
Or maybe not:
is the start of that fork (which appears to be inadvertent) but it contains no changes.
(3) By Richard Hipp (drh) on 2020-08-16 16:23:44 in reply to 1.3 [link] [source]
See the wrong way to close a branch post for an explanation of what happened.
(4) By Stephan Beal (stephan) on 2020-08-16 16:24:54 in reply to 1.3 [link] [source]
Update: this is mostly explained in /forumpost/1477c7840b, but i'm still at a loss to explain why i was locally on
bad-branch without having done an explicit update to tip.
(5) By Richard Hipp (drh) on 2020-08-16 16:39:52 in reply to 4 [source]
Your check-out remembers the specific SHA3 hash that you have checked out, not the name of the branch. So when the check-in that you had checked out moved to the new branch, that moved your check-out with it.
(6) By Stephan Beal (stephan) on 2020-08-16 16:41:43 in reply to 5 [link] [source]
That makes perfect sense, and now i'm just surprised that it hasn't happened to me before.
(7) By Richard Hipp (drh) on 2020-08-16 16:44:19 in reply to 6 [link] [source]
Suggestions for how to improve the UX are welcomed.
I suppose clients could detect when they have been moved to a new branch an issue a warning....
(8) By Stephan Beal (stephan) on 2020-08-16 16:54:17 in reply to 7 [link] [source]
It's happened once in... 12.5-ish years... so it doesn't seem all that pressing. It happened due to the explicit move of the trunk, and moving a branch like that is a real rarity.