Path: csiph.com!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed9.news.xs4all.nl!bofh.it!news.nic.it!robomod From: Julian Gilbey Newsgroups: linux.debian.maint.python Subject: Re: Messed up a salsa commit - how best to fix? Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2022 12:10:01 +0200 Message-ID: References: X-Mailbox-Line: From debian-python-request@lists.debian.org Tue Apr 26 10:03:44 2022 Old-Return-Path: X-Amavis-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.71 tagged_above=-10000 required=5.3 tests=[BAYES_00=-2, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, LDO_WHITELIST=-5, MONEY=0.5, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Policyd-Weight: using cached result; rate: -4.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/19906 List-ID: List-URL: List-Archive: https://lists.debian.org/msgid-search/YmfDbC5Ky2cwF0aN@d-and-j.net Approved: robomod@news.nic.it Lines: 62 Organization: linux.* mail to news gateway Sender: robomod@news.nic.it X-Original-Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2022 11:03:24 +0100 X-Original-Message-ID: X-Original-References: <20220424204251.u7kqa2cd7xf2sabw@mail.gaussglocke.de> Xref: csiph.com linux.debian.maint.python:14082 Hi Timo (and Geert), On Sun, Apr 24, 2022 at 10:42:51PM +0200, Timo Röhling wrote: > Hi Julian, > > * Julian Gilbey [2022-04-24 21:01]: > > Somehow I managed to really mess up a commit to python-qtconsole: the > > upstream and pristine-tar branches do not have the upstream/5.3.0 > > sources (the current ones). However, there's already an > > upstream/5.3.0 tag in the repository, pointing to a commit to the > > master branch. > > > > I think the simplest thing to do is to "rewrite history": delete the > > head commits to the master branch and the 5.3.0 tags, and then > > recommit correctly and force-push to salsa. > > > > Would people be OK with me doing this, or do you have an alternative > > suggestion? > I looked at the Salsa repository, and it is not so bad. It seems like you > forgot to pull the latest changes in upstream and pristine-tar from > the 5.2.2 import first, so your import of 5.3.0 forked the those branches > unintentionally. > [...] Thanks for all the advice! I managed to sort it moderately cleanly in the end, and this email records what happened and what I did, in case anyone might benefit from this in the future. It turns out that I'd also messed up more than I'd realised: even when I pulled in the updated master branch, I didn't pull the upstream branch, so managed to introduce even more conflicts. Oh well. But the key things that allowed for a moderately clean fix were: * I'd correctly used gbp import-orig to pull in the original 5.3.0 distribution to the master branch * I had an upstream/5.3.0 tag in my local repository (which for some reason I hadn't pushed, yeesh) So the state of the salsa repository was (in an ideal world where I'd pulled upstream): - master included the upstream/5.3.0 commit, tagged as upstream/5.3.0, along with further commits - upstream was at upstream/5.2.2 - pristine-tar contained data up to upstream/5.2.2 To fix the problem, I did: $ git checkout upstream $ git reset --hard upstream/5.3.0 $ git checkout master $ gbp pristine-tar commit and that fixed everything. I finished with git push --all and git push --tags. I hope I don't make this mistake again! Best wishes, Julian