Re: [PATCH 12/20] remote-bzr: split marks file

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Apr 28, 2013, 18:47 UTC
Message-ID: <7v1u9usdag.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
In-Reply-To: <7v4nesvncw.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>

Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes:

Show 11 quoted lines

> Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> And in case anybody is thinking that remote-bzr is really a too fast
>> moving target; even if this managed to land in 'master', it's likely
>> that people were not able to push at all, and in fact, many were not
>> even able to clone in 1.8.2. So, hardly could be considered a
>> regression. Nevertheless, I caught it in time.
>
> You didn't.  I am already way too deep into today's 1.8.3-rc0
> integration cycle and I won't waste a couple of hours work just to
> revert this.

Oh, I was lucky ;-) I mistook this with the other 9-patch bzr clean-up series that I applied to 'master' for -rc0.

Pushing out a tagged-tip takes a lot longer than the normal tip because a lot more than what people see have to happen on my end.

Reverting a single patch is simple, but we do not want to do that on top of "Git 1.8.3-rc0" commit and move the unpublished tag to point at the revert.

Which means pretty much everything needs to be redone (one example among many is that the tagname will propagate to the htmldocs and manpages repositories, so their unpublished histories need to be rewound).

But I didn't have to do that in the end ;-)