I have local branch and master branch. I use hg merge local branch with master branch, after that I find that master branch version is modified and I have to merge with new master branch.
I don't know how to back local branch status and merge new master branch.
If you committed the merge and then found that there were new changesets on master, you could do either of:
hg pull the new changesets, then hg merge again, then push the two merges.
hg strip your merge, then hg pull and hg merge <localbranch> again.
If you haven't committed first merge yet, you could hg update default -C to throw out the merge changes, then hg pull and hg merge <localbranch> again.
Related
So someone deleted a remote branch, but a changeset was lost when he deleted the branch.
I have the changeset on my local repository and tried to merge the changeset to my default branch, then I pushed, but I got an error "abort: push creates new remote head 650367cd0ff4 on branch 'rc'!"
There are few options, depending on the situation you have:
If the whole branch was stripped and you have that branch locally then you can push it again:
hg push --new-branch
This is recommended, because Mercurial will anyway send your local commits to remote repo every time you will do push (until you strip these commits locally). You can then close unwanted branch with --close-branch (this will leave all commits in repo, but just mark branch as closed/unused).
hg ci --close-branch
Graft the wanted commit locally from some branch to other:
hg graft -r 123
hg push
Create new remote head ("abort: push creates new remote head 650367cd0ff4 on branch 'rc'!"). It's nothing wrong, it just means that one of your branches will have two separate top commits. These commits can be merged together later.
hg push -f
For Mercurial, right now there is default branch and newfeature branch... is it true that if I am on
the newfeature branch, and do an hg pull and hg update, it will always ask me to merge? (if there are changesets that I pulled)
Also, it seems that I cannot just do hg merge? I need to use hg heads and then look at what the newfeature branch's head is (say it is revision 6880),
then I need to hg merge -r 6880? Because otherwise, will Mercurial merge the newfeature branch with the default branch automatically? I cannot do hg merge -b newfeature, it seems, as there is no -b option for hg merge.
Is there an easier way other than using hg heads to look for the revision to merge? Isn't there a more automatic way?
You've got two questions there, let me take them one at a time (with a little paraphrasing):
Q. When I hg pull and get a new head Mercurial suggest I hg merge. Do I have to?
A. No. Mercurial is just warning you you have more heads than than you did, and that if you don't like that arrangement you can merge to stop it. Named branches are heads, so you'll see that warning if pulling gets you a new head
Q. If I want to merge one named branch into another do I have to provide the revision number?
A. No. It's true that hg merge will only automatically select heads on the same named branch, but you can do hg merge -r newfeature and that merges in the changeset from the point of divergence up to the head on newfeature (6880 in your example) exactly the same as hg update -r 6880 would.
In either case, after committing that merge you'll have no heads on newfeature (the new, resulting head is on default because that was the branch name of your parent before you started the merge. However, just doing this after the merge:
hg update newfeature
...code....
hg commit
will create a new head on the newfeature branch, and you're right back as you were before the merge, except all of the changes that were on new feature are also available in default now.
If you pull a changeset or changesets from one branch into another branch that share the same root changeset. Mercurial will have multiple heads as you have so noticed. It will only suggest that you merge when you do an hg update on one of the branches.
You shouldn't have to specify which revision to merge to, assuming that you want to merge the tips of each of the branches. hg merge should suffice.
Your command structure should look as follow
hg pull -b 'branchYouWantToPullFrom`
hg update
hg merge
hg commit
hg merge works in your working copy, which is always connected to a specific branch.
You have to specify a branch name only if you want to merge your current branch with another branch: hg merge branch_name.
hg pull updates your repository with all remote changes. Then you have to update your working copy, that is connected to a specific branch. So, when you type hg update command, you update your working copy with all changes in your current branch.
If you want to switch to another branch you have to type hg update branch_name. You can type hg branch to know your current branch.
The only reason to merge with a specific revision is when you have three or more heads, a strange situation probably caused by some hg push -f (extremely bad practice). If you are in this situation, the right way to know which revisions you have to merge is hg heads. In a normal situation hg heads returns one head per branch, so you don't have to merge two heads of different branches if you don't want.
If you're working on a branch and someone has committed and pushed some changes on the same branch, you have to pull and merge before your push, simply with hg merge, no revision or branch.
I hope this will help you.
If there are two branches, and I have been doing work on the default branch, I think one way to push to the foo branch of the other clone is
cd ~/development/clone2
hg up default
hg pull ~/developmet/clone1
hg up foo
hg merge default
or
cd ~/development/clone1
hg up default
hg push ~/developmet/clone2
cd ~/development/clone2
hg up foo
hg merge default
These 2 methods work exactly the same? (one is a pull, one is a push).
Is there an easier way to directly push clone1's default branch to clone2's foo branch? thanks.
(I use clone 1 to see all the changes I have done (without seeing anybody else's changes), and use clone2 to merge and integrate with other team members)
You can always push and pull a single revision and all of it ancestors using:
hg push -r revision ~/development/clone1
or
hg pull -r revision ~/development/clone2
There's no way to "push to another branch" because you'll always have to merge the two different branches manually
Both methods you described work exactly the same, but the first one is recommended (Always do the merge work in your clone, not the integration repository or somebody else's clone)
Maybe is an intentional omission but in both examples you have to commit the result of the merge and in the first example you have to push the merge changeset back to clone2
So in ~/development/clone1 do:
hg up default
hg pull -u ~/development/clone2
hg up foo
hg merge default
hg ci -m 'merged default into foo'
hg push ~/development/clone2
If you do this a lot you may consider adding this lines to your ~/development/clone1/.hg/hgrc file
[paths]
default = ~/development/clone2
This way you can omit the repository path when you're pulling and pushing from the integration repository
I'm trying to move changes from a couple of changesets into one changeset on the other branch. There are other changes in between that I want to skip, so I don't want to simply merge everything.
hg transplant moves the changes correctly, but now I'd like to flatten them into a single commit. How can I do that?
You can fold them by
Backup the repository, a failure during the process can destroy data
transplant the desired changes to the target branch
transform them there into a mercurial queue (hg qimport -r first-to-fold-rev:)
fold them into one patch (hg qpop until the first patch is applied, then hg qfold <<patch name>> the following patches into this one)
Edit the commit message (When there are NO OUTSTANDING CHANGES hg qrefresh -e)
apply the single patch to your repository (hg qfinish -a).
When there are further unfolded patches:
hg qpush until the head patch
hg qfinish -a
Review the new repo state (hg glog/hg incoming)
hg rebase has an '--collapse` option. I think this is what you are looking for.
I'm having the following problem: I commited two changesets into the default branch, but now I think I should put them into a new branch. That means I want to branch of from the revision before these changes happened, put those changesets into the newly created branch and erase them from the default branch's history.
What's the best way to do this in Mercurial?
hg rebase can probably do that.
Otherwise you can do it manually:
hg clone -r <previous rev> old new
cd new
hg branch <branchname>
hg export -R ../old <first cset> |hg import
hg export -R ../old <second cset> |hg import