[petsc-dev] merge conflict problem

[Barry Smith]

> On Aug 14, 2015, at 6:24 PM, Satish Balay <balay at mcs.anl.gov> wrote:
> 
> On Fri, 14 Aug 2015, Barry Smith wrote:
> 
>> 
>>  Jed,
>> 
>>  So I made a fix in maint that required changing an enum value in MatOption from negative to positive (ok, once you finish yelling about me changing the ABI in a patch) but when I try to merge my branch to barry/fix-nonew-notcollective/maint  I get a conflict because you seem to have added another entry to MatOption after the release 
>> 
>> 97da8949 include/petscmat.h                    (Jed Brown            2015-02-16 12:25:52 -0700  347)               MAT_SUBSET_OFF_PROC_ENTRIES = 19,
>> 97da8949 include/petscmat.h                    (Jed Brown            2015-02-16 12:25:52 -0700  348)               MAT_OPTION_MAX = 20} MatOption;
>> 
>> but 
>> 
>> $ git branch --contains 97da8949
>> * next
>> ~/Src/petsc (next=) 
> 
> You need '-r' for checking the remote branches.
> [the above check defaults to local branches - hence isn't useful.]

   Thanks. This is a moronically stupid default for git to have.

> 
> $ git branch -r --contains 97da8949
>  origin/jed/mat-assembly-perf

  I updated this branch with my new branch and added this comment


Jed this fucking 6+ month running thing in next that is not in master is a royal fucking pain in the ass and
an abuse of git. I think it is not justified to ever have anything in next for more than a few weeks at most.
Either take it out of next if it is broken or put it in master if it is not broken. Hanging around in next but
not master for ever is not a good policy.

  So Jed do something about this fucking branch in next but not master before I fucking explode. 

  Barry




>  origin/next
>  origin/next-jun-2015
>  origin/pr329/master/Fande-Kong/matpartitioning-hierarch
>  origin/pr332/master/Fande-Kong/mat-increaseoverlap-scalable
> 
> Satish
> 
> 
>> 
>> 
>> So I don't know what branch you made that change in. 
>> 
>> Meanwhile I need to keep barry/fix-nonew-notcollective/maint the same because it has to merge into maint and instead put your MAT_SUBSET_OFF_PROC_ENTRIES up to 20 in your branch then merge both into next.
>> 
>>  So how do I do this?
>> 
>>  Barry