[petsc-dev] PETSc developers who use weird MPI

[Satish Balay]

On Sat, 2 Nov 2013, Barry Smith wrote:

> >>   The reason I had to merge all that stuff into saws was that saws could not merge into next because those branches so changed next. I had to merge them into saws before I could get saws into next. But I missed 1/2 a one (somehow) getting an outdated verson of the sf-sfbasics into saws.
> >> 
> > 
> > No the more appropriate thing here would be to merge/rebase to latest
> > master.
> 
>    Doesn’t work because those things are not in master; in fact the first thing I did was to merge in master then I needed to merge in the other things in order to get into next

I meant to say - if you wanted to split up 'merge barry/saws to next'
into multiple steps [to ease up the merge process] then 'merge master
to barry/saws is an appropriate thing to do - and then merge
barry/saws to next.

But spliting up the merge as 'merge sf-sfbasics to barry/saws' and then
'merge barry/saws to next' should be avoided.

I find kdiff3 very useful in tricky merge situations.

BTW: in the normal workflow - a similar merge would be needed when
'barry/saws' gets merged to 'master' - but I think form what Jed said
- git tracks this merge resolution in next - and reuses that for
future merges [aka merge into master] - so that step should be
seamless?

Satish