[petsc-dev] Fwd: Undelivered Mail Returned to Sender

[Jed Brown]

Rebase changes mtime on files that are changed in "my" copy, but not in the
upstream version.

Matt, you are just reading the wrong (i.e. unhelpful) side of the diff.
On Feb 18, 2012 9:45 PM, "Matthew Knepley" <knepley at gmail.com> wrote:

> Fix the mail headers for this thing. My message is below.
>
>    Matt
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Mail Delivery System <MAILER-DAEMON at mailrelay.anl.gov>
> Date: Sat, Feb 18, 2012 at 9:44 PM
> Subject: Undelivered Mail Returned to Sender
> To: knepley at gmail.com
>
>
> This is the mail system at host mailrelay.anl.gov.
>
> I'm sorry to have to inform you that your message could not
> be delivered to one or more recipients. It's attached below.
>
> For further assistance, please send mail to postmaster.
>
> If you do so, please include this problem report. You can
> delete your own text from the attached returned message.
>
>                   The mail system
>
> <petsc-dev at zimbra.anl.gov>: host zimbra.anl.gov[130.202.101.12] said: 550
> 5.1.1
>    <petsc-dev at zimbra.anl.gov>: Recipient address rejected: zimbra.anl.gov(in
>    reply to RCPT TO command)
>
> Final-Recipient: rfc822; petsc-dev at zimbra.anl.gov
> Original-Recipient: rfc822;petsc-dev at zimbra.anl.gov
> Action: failed
> Status: 5.1.1
> Remote-MTA: dns; zimbra.anl.gov
> Diagnostic-Code: smtp; 550 5.1.1 <petsc-dev at zimbra.anl.gov>: Recipient
> address
>    rejected: zimbra.anl.gov
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Matthew Knepley <knepley at gmail.com>
> To: petsc-dev at zimbra.anl.gov, For users of the development version of
> PETSc <petsc-dev at mcs.anl.gov>
> Cc:
> Date: Sat, 18 Feb 2012 21:44:32 -0600
> Subject: Re: [petsc-dev] Merge sets
> On Sat, Feb 18, 2012 at 9:28 PM, Barry Smith <bsmith at mcs.anl.gov> wrote:
>
>>
>> On Feb 18, 2012, at 3:18 PM, Matthew Knepley wrote:
>>
>> > I have lost the BB battle, however can we at least start using
>> >
>> >   hg pull --rebase
>> >
>> > so that we avoid this
>> >
>> >   https://bitbucket.org/petsc/petsc-dev/changeset/ad9064ecab66
>>
>>
>>  1) I don't like the idea of a pull doing anything locally on my machine.
>> I want it to only get the stuff from the remote repository and bring it to
>> my machine. This reeks of svn
>>
>
> I see it as a replacement for multiple repositories and carefully
> orchestrated pulling, like Linus used to do, in order
> to keep change sets clean. It is not giving up on the concept of change
> sets like svn.
>
>
>>  2) If the rebase implementation has been fixed from the hacky versions
>> that fucked unnecessarily with my file system I'll be happy to start using
>> rebase. Is it fixed?
>>
>
> I cannot identify the behavior from that description. However, I have been
> using it for almost a year now, and the
> nice thing is that if anything goes wrong (merges with MacHg can screw up
> badly), I just do
>
>   hg rollback
>   hg revert --all
>
> You might be talking about the need to revert.
>
>     Matt
>
>
>>   Barry
>>
>> >
>> >      Matt
>> >
>> > --
>> > What most experimenters take for granted before they begin their
>> experiments is infinitely more interesting than any results to which their
>> experiments lead.
>> > -- Norbert Wiener
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> What most experimenters take for granted before they begin their
> experiments is infinitely more interesting than any results to which their
> experiments lead.
> -- Norbert Wiener
>
>
>
>
> --
> What most experimenters take for granted before they begin their
> experiments is infinitely more interesting than any results to which their
> experiments lead.
> -- Norbert Wiener
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-dev/attachments/20120219/5d37c972/attachment.html>