Re: Patchy up and running now

[James]

David,

On 4 March 2012 08:20, David Kastrup <address@hidden> wrote:
> James <address@hidden> writes:
>
>> I don't really understand why I still had the same issues as I had
>> before - git would complain about shallow repositories (I did look it
>> up but it didn't shed any light)
>
> I answered your respective last time on the list with a recipe of how to
> unshallow a clone.
>

Yes you did

--snip--

git fetch --depth=1000000

in your original repository.  That should convert it from a "shallow"
repository to a full one.
--snip--

That didn't work :(

>> so I simply rm -rf'ed my lilypond-git and cloned down another one and
>> it all worked fine.
>
> That's something I would avoid doing: you not just lose all local
> branches, but also your reflog in that manner.  Any work that you did in
> the repository locally is lost then.  The reflog is handy for reviving
> things which you removed because of an error or erroneous assumptions.
>
> In any case, the deed is done now.

It's ok. I don't work with my own branches ever. I make a patch and
save the patch, then I do a hard reset (with lilygit) and make the
next patch, save the next patch etc then apply patch X when I need to
change it or push it. There are many cons to that method I know :) but
the pros for me outweigh them.

My patches tend to touch files that no one else touches :( so it's
rare I ever end up with a patch that cannot be applied at a later
date.

So I didn't lose any work.

>
>> Anyway, I'm back at home this evening and will have a few more test
>> runs (with cron just to make sure I can leave it unattended) and then
>> by Monday I should be running 'lilypond-patchy-staging.py' as often as
>> people want me to. Any specific schedule?
>
> Don't schedule it to run at the same times as Phil since then we are
> more likely to get complaints from the jobs (and it is not necessary).
> I'll probably try making the push procedure aware of this particular
> situation of partial overlap at some point of time, just to make the
> automated procedure complain less if many people are being helpful.  But
> it is not like anything can go wrong in that manner.

I'm not sure if Phil wants to leave his machine running during his day
(I know it's too noisy during the evening) but I'll let him tell me
when he wants to schedule his. I have said I get intermittent loss of
internet so him and I running in tandem or Phil filling in the odd gap
in my schedule would make my lack of internet less problematic.

Not saying I am down that much, but very occasionally it has been for
a whole day.


-- 
--

James