Re: [Monotone-devel] [Fwd: monotone_0.22-1_i386.changes ACCEPTED]

[Tomas Fasth]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker skrev:
> In message <address@hidden> on Tue, 09 Aug 2005 23:39:28 +0200, Tomas Fasth 
> <address@hidden> said:
> 
> tomfa> Monotone version 0.22 has been accepted by the Debian installer
> tomfa> process and will shortly reach the Debian package archive for
> tomfa> unstable (etch).
> tomfa> 
> tomfa> I have updated the debian files in venge.net repository accordingly.
> tomfa> 
> tomfa> Nathaniel, when you build your -0.1 packages, are you then using a
> tomfa> sarge (stable) based Debian installation or something newer?
> 
> I got to ask, which revision is it based on?  You see, based on the
> graph of your changes (those that you had trouble with, you can easily
> see them with monotone-viz), I'm dubious you actually packaged 0.22,
> unless you based it on some other source than your line of changes in
> the monotone repository.

Understandable question, but no worry. I always base my packaging
for upload to Debian on the release files, not the repository.

> As far as I can see, your line of changes in the debian changelog
> started at e9ec2bd2a80cc3deb7d386d1e6a260ff671c6d57 (this is confirmed
> by the change notification I got, which is just four revisions from
> 44ed8807bead656889fb5022f974e13a7169098c, which is tagged monotone-0.20.

Oh, I see. I'm very sorry, I'm still quite uneasy with how to turn
the knobs in the right way on monotone for my needs. Without using
monotone-viz, only the CLI, how can I ensure my working copy is
following the releases? Somehow I lost track of the head, and I
don't understand how it came to be. I know, I'm not very educated on
these matters.

> I see from what you said later that you tried a merge, but failed.
> 
> This is one of the occations when I could consider doing a monotone
> pull and monotone update before hacking.

Actually, I did exactly this, pull and update before applying the
changes. But I guess my working copy was locked on a branch separate
from head?

- --
Tomas Fasth <address@hidden>
GnuPG Fingerprint: DC7B 9453 7F26 1BF9 6B21 9F90 C187 7355 9FE8 D504
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFC+aYcwYdzVZ/o1QQRAituAKCHdzSIrshtFk6qByXQ5IWVRHE1lwCfWAuP
ze73y+TzLYx6OYXfyVZNM2I=
=oBzd
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----