Moving fogbugz entries from Pharo 5 to Pharo 6

Hello,

I have a problem in several bugs I opened on the bug tracker. When I opened them, Pharo 6 development has not started, so the slices were committed in the Pharo 5 inbox. As Pharo 5 was in stabilization phasis for release, my slices were not integrated but postponed to Pharo 6 (which I understand and accept). But since now the development is in Pharo 6, the monkey checks the slice in Pharo 6 inbox and can't find my slices because they are in Pharo 5 inbox. See for example 18039 or 17451.

What is the right way to move the slices from Pharo 5 inbox to Pharo 6 inbox ? I don't want to end up in a situation where it is not possible to integrate my slice because of a "Missing ancestor", so how can I move the slices from Pharo 5 inbox to Pharo 6 inbox without having that problem ?

Thanks.

Is there a problem in simply adding Inbox50 repo and clicking on the "Copy" button to put it to Inbox60? Or am I missing something?

Peter

On Mon, May 16, 2016 at 2:12 PM, Clément Bera <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hello,

I have a problem in several bugs I opened on the bug tracker. When I opened them, Pharo 6 development has not started, so the slices were committed in the Pharo 5 inbox. As Pharo 5 was in stabilization phasis for release, my slices were not integrated but postponed to Pharo 6 (which I understand and accept). But since now the development is in Pharo 6, the monkey checks the slice in Pharo 6 inbox and can't find my slices because they are in Pharo 5 inbox. See for example 18039 or 17451.

What is the right way to move the slices from Pharo 5 inbox to Pharo 6 inbox ? I don't want to end up in a situation where it is not possible to integrate my slice because of a "Missing ancestor", so how can I move the slices from Pharo 5 inbox to Pharo 6 inbox without having that problem ?

Thanks.

> On 17 May 2016, at 08:01, Clément Bera <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Well I tried that and sometimes the integrator can't integrate because of a "Missing ancestor".

You have to copy all dependents as well, a slice is just an empty holder. But I guess you already know.

> I guess I will do what you say for my bugs and when the problem arises again I will ask again with a concrete example.
>
> Nvm
>
> On Mon, May 16, 2016 at 3:34 PM, Peter Uhnák <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Is there a problem in simply adding Inbox50 repo and clicking on the "Copy" button to put it to Inbox60? Or am I missing something?
>
> Peter
>
> On Mon, May 16, 2016 at 2:12 PM, Clément Bera <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I have a problem in several bugs I opened on the bug tracker. When I opened them, Pharo 6 development has not started, so the slices were committed in the Pharo 5 inbox. As Pharo 5 was in stabilization phasis for release, my slices were not integrated but postponed to Pharo 6 (which I understand and accept). But since now the development is in Pharo 6, the monkey checks the slice in Pharo 6 inbox and can't find my slices because they are in Pharo 5 inbox. See for example 18039 or 17451.
>
> What is the right way to move the slices from Pharo 5 inbox to Pharo 6 inbox ? I don't want to end up in a situation where it is not possible to integrate my slice because of a "Missing ancestor", so how can I move the slices from Pharo 5 inbox to Pharo 6 inbox without having that problem ?
>
> Thanks.
>
>

Yes, it is fragile.

It's a bit like an application that saves a document as a couple of files. When you later copy only one file, you break the format.

> On 17 May 2016, at 08:37, Peter Uhnák <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> But how come saving a slice in the beginning also saves the dependents? I thought it acted like a package.
>
> Wouldn't this be a bug then? It is certainly bug-inducing.
>
> On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 8:12 AM, Sven Van Caekenberghe <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > On 17 May 2016, at 08:01, Clément Bera <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > Well I tried that and sometimes the integrator can't integrate because of a "Missing ancestor".
>
> You have to copy all dependents as well, a slice is just an empty holder. But I guess you already know.
>
> > I guess I will do what you say for my bugs and when the problem arises again I will ask again with a concrete example.
> >
> > Nvm
> >
> > On Mon, May 16, 2016 at 3:34 PM, Peter Uhnák <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > Is there a problem in simply adding Inbox50 repo and clicking on the "Copy" button to put it to Inbox60? Or am I missing something?
> >
> > Peter
> >
> > On Mon, May 16, 2016 at 2:12 PM, Clément Bera <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I have a problem in several bugs I opened on the bug tracker. When I opened them, Pharo 6 development has not started, so the slices were committed in the Pharo 5 inbox. As Pharo 5 was in stabilization phasis for release, my slices were not integrated but postponed to Pharo 6 (which I understand and accept). But since now the development is in Pharo 6, the monkey checks the slice in Pharo 6 inbox and can't find my slices because they are in Pharo 5 inbox. See for example 18039 or 17451.
> >
> > What is the right way to move the slices from Pharo 5 inbox to Pharo 6 inbox ? I don't want to end up in a situation where it is not possible to integrate my slice because of a "Missing ancestor", so how can I move the slices from Pharo 5 inbox to Pharo 6 inbox without having that problem ?
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> >
>
>
>

Copy slice from Monticello Browser also copies dependencies.

But now I always got merge conflicts from Monkey while no conflicts when I merge it manually

2016-05-17 9:06 GMT+02:00 Sven Van Caekenberghe <[hidden email]>:

Yes, it is fragile.

It's a bit like an application that saves a document as a couple of files. When you later copy only one file, you break the format.

> On 17 May 2016, at 08:37, Peter Uhnák <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> But how come saving a slice in the beginning also saves the dependents? I thought it acted like a package.
>
> Wouldn't this be a bug then? It is certainly bug-inducing.
>
> On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 8:12 AM, Sven Van Caekenberghe <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > On 17 May 2016, at 08:01, Clément Bera <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > Well I tried that and sometimes the integrator can't integrate because of a "Missing ancestor".
>
> You have to copy all dependents as well, a slice is just an empty holder. But I guess you already know.
>
> > I guess I will do what you say for my bugs and when the problem arises again I will ask again with a concrete example.
> >
> > Nvm
> >
> > On Mon, May 16, 2016 at 3:34 PM, Peter Uhnák <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > Is there a problem in simply adding Inbox50 repo and clicking on the "Copy" button to put it to Inbox60? Or am I missing something?
> >
> > Peter
> >
> > On Mon, May 16, 2016 at 2:12 PM, Clément Bera <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I have a problem in several bugs I opened on the bug tracker. When I opened them, Pharo 6 development has not started, so the slices were committed in the Pharo 5 inbox. As Pharo 5 was in stabilization phasis for release, my slices were not integrated but postponed to Pharo 6 (which I understand and accept). But since now the development is in Pharo 6, the monkey checks the slice in Pharo 6 inbox and can't find my slices because they are in Pharo 5 inbox. See for example 18039 or 17451.
> >
> > What is the right way to move the slices from Pharo 5 inbox to Pharo 6 inbox ? I don't want to end up in a situation where it is not possible to integrate my slice because of a "Missing ancestor", so how can I move the slices from Pharo 5 inbox to Pharo 6 inbox without having that problem ?
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> >
>
>
>