dvcs

问题 That is, in Mercurial, if Peter cloned from me by hg clone c:\mycode e:\code into his e:\code let's say there is a file code.txt and it contains the text the code is 7 Now, when I change it to the code is 11 and hg commit, then he can get my code using hg pull and hg update. Now his version says the code is 11 But if I decide the change was wrong and hg rollback, then my repository should have the 7 version, while the working directory should have the 11 version. So when Peter does an hg pull

问题 We have many release and custom branches. When bugfix occur it MUST propagated across many branches. I have several related questions: who decide (which role) where propagate bugfix who control (which role) bugfix propagation where fix bug - in trunk/default or in selected branch? is it need test bugfix on all branches by bugfix developer or only on original and pass another branch testing to QA team? who propagate bugfix - original bugfix creator or assigned separate person (which role)? 回答1

问题 How can I make mercurial order the graph log output of hg log -G by commit date? Using hg log -r 'sort(all(), -date)' works without the graph log option as answered in [1], but that solution doesn't seem to have any effect on the order of the graph log. I'm looking for a mercurial equivalent of git log --graph --date-order . 来源： https://stackoverflow.com/questions/47270988/how-to-make-mercurial-sort-the-output-of-hg-log-g-by-commit-date

问题 We have a team of around 10 developers and we are frequently running into a situation where someone's changes got reverted unexpectedly. Our workflow has been very simple. Developers make local commits, pull from upstream, and then push to upstream (this is our workflow in a nutshell, but it may also include issuing pull requests on Github from a developer's personal fork of upstream). The strange behavior is a developer makes local commits, pulls from upstream, and then finds his changes

问题 Using Mercurial, say if I do an hg pull and hg up and now the local repo and working directory are both up to date. What if I commit often, say 1 day later, and then 2 days later, and want to diff with the revision as of right now? Otherwise, the diff is always comparing to the previous committed version. I can use pencil and paper and write down the revision number right now, say, 4117 , and then 1 day later, 2 days later, and any time before I am sure and push to the remote central repo, do

问题 I'm using Mercurial in a recent project. On the web server where I'm deploying the project I have a slightly different config file with production settings. The problem is when I pull and update , I often have to merge and commit as well. Is this the correct workflow? It seems strange that in order to be able to continue to update I have to be committing the changesets, I figured a merge would integrate them into my production branch and continue to do so each time i update. Is this a

问题 There are 2 git repositories, A and B On both there is only a master branch, and both are locally checked out and being worked on. I am pushing into B's master branch from A and I receive this message: warning: updating the current branch warning: Updating the currently checked out branch may cause confusion, warning: as the index and work tree do not reflect changes that are in HEAD. warning: As a result, you may see the changes you just pushed into it warning: reverted when you run 'git

问题 I have a repository that I created early in the learning curve of a project. As I've learned more, I've realized that this is creating problems because some of the files I want tracked aren't required in the compiled source. What I'd like to do is create a new "project" parent directory, move the existing source directory into that parent directory and the migrate the files that don't need to be compiled into that parent directory. Is that possible with git? Will I completely destroy all of

问题 Suppose I have several commits in local repo, and some uncommited changes in working dir. After hg pull , hg update , I get a couple of new changesets from central repo which create a new head in local repo. Now suppose, I don't want to merge those two heads and push, in which case I'll get the message that I have uncommited changes in working dir, when trying to merge. As well, suppose I don't want to use hg shelve in order to shelve uncommited changes and merge without problems, but would

问题 I may do development work for 2 weeks before one or two features get pushed to all the production servers, and since this is a Ruby on Rails project, many files can be modified. So using Mercurial as the source control, is there a good way to list all filenames that are modified (or added) by me, between the current version and revision 4822? (the number 4822 is before I do the first hg push , I do an hg out and see that the changeset that will go out is 4823, so I will diff with 4822)