In my local fork of the upstream Mercurial repository I have multiple branches. Prior to beginning work on one of the outdated branches feature I would like to obtain all the changes from the local default branch. How do I do that? When I execute:
hg up feature
hg merge default
I obtain an error message:
abort: merging with a working directory ancestor has no effect
I would like to obtain all the changes from the local default branch.
I would do a hg pull first.
Then hg up feature, to switch to such branch in case you are on another branch.
Then bring default changes into feature by doing hg merge default
abort: merging with a working directory ancestor has no effect
Such message indicates that the parent of the current revision at feature is the latest revision (or tip) in default in your working copy.
Related
I want to have local branch in my cloned repository that will not exist in main repository. To do this I create branch named "new_branch", develop and commit to it. Sometimes I make commites to default branch and after that I make "push -b default" that the branch "new_branch" not appeared in main repository. After the development in "new_branch" finished I make merge to default branch and I want to make push for default branch "push -b default". I get message "abort: push creates new remote branches: new_branch! (use 'hg push --new-branch' to create new remote branches)". Can I have a only local branch in Mercurial?
You can try:
LocalBranch Extension (only Tim Lee fork seems to work with current Mercurial)
MQ (and push without --mq option)
Phases can be used for this in modern Mercurial:
# hg phase --secret -r 7::10
Will mark changes 7 through 10 as secret, as so they won't be pushed, pulled, cloned, etc.
Once you create a branch using hg branch, it is a permanent part of the changeset. It will always require you to push using the --new-branch option. You cannot strip the branch name without modifying history.
If you want give a local name to a branch that does not get propagated when you push, then you should use hg bookmark instead.
In effect, I would like to do the opposite of "Merge with local"
To clarify:
We have a release branch and a default branch. When doing bug fixes on the release branch, here's the routine:
Update to the release branch
Implement bug fix, and commit
Update to the default branch
Right-click on the bug fix commit from the release branch, and select "Merge with local..."
Since a lot of work is done on the release branch, it gets tedious to Update between the branches all the time. In previous versions of TortoiseHg, I could select the branch before doing the merge, in effect doing a "Merge local with selected". This would eliminate steps 1 and 3 above.
Is this doable in TortoiseHg anymore?
Three-way merges are basically symmetric: you merge two divergent versions of your code (the two branches) into a single version (the merge commit). There is no technical different between updating to default and merging with release, or doing it the other way around. In particular, the merge conflicts are exactly the same.
In Mercurial, there is an extra twist because of the named branch names: by default, the merge commit will inherit the branch name of its first parent. If you don't update to default before merging, the first parent will thus be release. But you can change the branch name before committing.
On the command line it's just:
$ hg update release
$ hg merge default
$ hg branch default
$ hg commit -m 'Merged release into default'
In the pre-2.0 versions of TortoiseHg you were presented with this dialog to commit the merge:
The button above the commit message saying "branch: release" could be used to change branch of the next commit — the merge commit. In TortoiseHg 2.x the dialog looks like this:
and there's no longer a button for changing branch.
Maybe you can ask the TortoiseHg developers to add the button again, or you can use Henrik Stuart's TortoiseHg if you want a pre-2.0 TortoiseHg that is compatible with modern versions of Mercurial.
I haven't found a way, even command line merge is always with local. I just keep a clone for each branch and switch between clones instead of updating a single clone. For large projects this prevents the usually time-intensive "rebuild all" when changing branches. Adds extra pull step but saves time overall:
In release clone, implement bug fix and commit.
In default clone, pull from release and merge with local.
I am trying to do something very simple: create a new branch. But I messed up. Where did I make the mistake, and how do I fix it?
I am the only user of Mercurial. I had revision 54 committed and pushed to remote repository. I wanted to create a branch based on revision 53, so I updated my local copy to revision 53, made changes, and committed (ignoring the warning about "it's not the head"). Then when I am trying to push to remote repository, it says
abort: push creates new remote head
Maybe I needed to tell Mercurial that I want to create a new branch? If so, how and at what point?
Thanks!
You tell Mercurial that it can go ahead with
$ hg push --force
You need to force it since multiple (unnamed) heads are normally discouraged. The problem with them is that people that clone the repository wont know which one to use. But since you're the only user you can just go ahead and push.
The alternative is to use a named branch (with hg branch) and then you'll use
$ hg push --new-branch
to allow the creation of a new branch on the remote. Named branches have the advantage that they make it easy to distinguish the two branches. They have the disadvantage that they are permanent. Permanent means that you cannot remove the branch name from the changesets on the branch — the name is literally baked directly into the changeset.
Bookmarks provide a way to have non-permanent branch names, see hg help bookmarks.
Another reason for this error: probably there are some UNMERGED changes form the central repo in your default branch.
hg up default
hg merge
hg ci -m "Merge"
hg pus
I did this. Using TortoiseHg ... this is how I fixed it:
In settings, I enabled the Strip extension then right clicked the branch i did not want, Modified History - strip. If you have pushed, then it needs to be stripped from all other repositories, including workmates who have pulled your unwanted branch.
An alternative is to merge the unwanted branch into your main branch, but do not take any of the changes from that branch - I am unsure of how that mechanism works.
In a project, I have a default branch and another named branch. After a merging both branches and committing it, the graph in TortoiseHg shows that both branches have been merged. However, pushing to a remote repository (which is at the stage before branching, it only has the default branch), I get the message "abort: push creates new remote branches".
If I'm not mistaken, I'm left with one branch after merging, so why this error message? Note: the graph still shows that I have 2 heads, is it in anyway related to this?
You're getting that error message because the named branch -- and all its changesets -- still exists in your local repository: you've merged the changes into the default branch, that's all.
You see two heads because you're using a named branch: from the help text for hg heads (the command line equivalent of selecting Heads in the repository explorer):
Branch heads are changesets that have no child changeset on the same branch.
Since you have two branches in your local repository (default and the named branch), you have two heads by definition.
To resolve the error message that you're getting, in the repository explorer, there's a Push New Branch option at the bottom of the Synchronize menu; select it, then you should be able to push to the remote repository.
It seems naming a previously unnamed branch doesn't really work out. It creates a nasty multiple heads problem that I can't find a solution for.
Here is the workflow...
UserA starts working on feature that they expect to be small, so they just start working(off the default branch). The change turns out to be a large project and will need multiple contributors. So UserA issues... hg branch "Feature1" and continues working, committing locally s needed.
UserA then pulls down the changes from the central repo so he can push.
At this point, why does hg heads return 3 heads? It shows 2 for default and 1 for Feature1. The first head for default is the latest change by another user on the branch(irrelevant). The second default head is the commit prior to the hg branch "Feature1" commit.
The central repository has rules enforced so that only 1 head per branch is allowed, so forcing a push isn't an option. The repo doesn't want multiple heads on the default branch.
UserA should be able to push these changes so that other users can see the Feature1 branch and help out. I can't seem to find a way to "correct" this. I don't think I can re-write the branch of the initial commits for the feature, before it was a named branch.
I know the initial changes before the named branch are technically on the default branch, but does that mean they will be heads until that Feature1 branch is merged?
I have found a solution without have to re-clone and merge changes in. I prefer this method mainly for historical purposes as I think it's valuable information on what happened with the feature (aka it started small and then was re-thought to be larger etc..)
In my example, UserA should update to the unwanted head on default and close that branch of default, as it is unwanted. This will leave 2 heads one for default and one for Feature1 as expected.
hg update -r X // X is the rev of the unwanted head.
hg commit --close-branch -m "Moved to Named Branch Feature1, cleaning up initial work"
Then update to the Feature1 branch, push and continue working.
Another workflow is almost the same except the UserA decided to push Feature1 for others to help and default has not been moved forward by anyone else. The local repo only has 2 heads and the user could push, but UserA does NOT want to just push as the tip of default would now be the changeset that really "belongs" to Feature1.
UserA should update to the latest, unwanted changeset of default. Then revert the default back to the revision before UserA starting working.
hg update default
hg revert -r Y // Y is the changeset before UserA started working on the feature
hg commit -m "Reverting changes that now exist in Feature1 branch"
Then update to the Feature1 branch, push and continue working.
The reason you're seeing two heads on the default branch in the local repo is because, after the most recent common ancestor, the changesets in the central repo have nothing in common with the changesets in the local repo.
To solve your problem:
Create a new local clone of the central repo at whatever revision you want (it will probably be easier if you use the most recent common ancestor).
hg clone -r common_ancestor central local2
Export the changes from the first local repo. Note the colon after first_local_change to get all the changes in that repo.
cd local1
hg export -r first_local_change: > ../local1.patch
Go to the new local repository, create the feature branch to import the changes into, then import them:
cd ../local2
hg branch feature
hg import ../local1.patch
hg import has an option to use the branch information in the patch file, but it's disabled by default.
At this point, you can continue using the new local repo in the original one's place. Also, I would double check to make sure that everything is as it should be in the new repo.
We found this to be a very big problem with our team (doing branch-per-feature) and ultimately stopped the hgweb.cgi script working (HTTP 414 Request too Long).
from hg help heads: hg heads with no args will show branch heads, which by definition are changesets that have no children on the same branch. hg heads --topo should give you result you need in this case.
Don't go via the central repository. Just have your developers pull from each other.