Smalltalk › Pharo › Pharo Smalltalk Developers

about spurious conflicts

_‹ Previous Topic Next Topic _›

Classic

List

Threaded

5 messages Options

stepharo

about spurious conflicts

Hi

while migrating some of the issues from 50 to 60, I noticed that many of
the conflicts are

not conflicts since the code of both methods and the protocols are the
same.

Does anybody experienced the same?

Here are some examples and I'm puzzled.

https://ci.inria.fr/pharo/job/Pharo-6.0-Issue-Validator/417//artifact/validationReport.html

https://ci.inria.fr/pharo/job/Pharo-6.0-Issue-Validator/418//artifact/validationReport.html

Stef

Nicolai Hess-3-2

Re: about spurious conflicts

2016-05-17 22:08 GMT+02:00 stepharo <[hidden email]>:

Hi

while migrating some of the issues from 50 to 60, I noticed that many of the conflicts are

not conflicts since the code of both methods and the protocols are the same.

Does anybody experienced the same?

Here are some examples and I'm puzzled.

https://ci.inria.fr/pharo/job/Pharo-6.0-Issue-Validator/417//artifact/validationReport.html

https://ci.inria.fr/pharo/job/Pharo-6.0-Issue-Validator/418//artifact/validationReport.html

The packages, these slices depends on, are older than what we have in the image.

This packages were only in the inbox. Every new package version (Nautilus for example) we

included afterwards, don't have these changes.

I am afraid all this changes needs to be redone again.

Stef

Max Leske

Re: about spurious conflicts

In reply to this post by stepharo

> On 17 May 2016, at 22:08, stepharo <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Hi
>
>
> while migrating some of the issues from 50 to 60, I noticed that many of the conflicts are
>
> not conflicts since the code of both methods and the protocols are the same.
>
> Does anybody experienced the same?
>
> Here are some examples and I'm puzzled.
>
> https://ci.inria.fr/pharo/job/Pharo-6.0-Issue-Validator/417//artifact/validationReport.html
>
> https://ci.inria.fr/pharo/job/Pharo-6.0-Issue-Validator/418//artifact/validationReport.html
>
>
> Stef
>
>

Yes, I saw the same with Fuel. But a simple manual merge with the latest version fixed that.

Denis Kudriashov

Re: about spurious conflicts

In reply to this post by stepharo

Yes.

It should be solved by 18251

2016-05-17 22:08 GMT+02:00 stepharo <[hidden email]>:

Hi

while migrating some of the issues from 50 to 60, I noticed that many of the conflicts are

not conflicts since the code of both methods and the protocols are the same.

Does anybody experienced the same?

Here are some examples and I'm puzzled.

https://ci.inria.fr/pharo/job/Pharo-6.0-Issue-Validator/417//artifact/validationReport.html

https://ci.inria.fr/pharo/job/Pharo-6.0-Issue-Validator/418//artifact/validationReport.html

Stef

Marcus Denker-4

Re: about spurious conflicts

In reply to this post by stepharo

The reason is that the merge does not find the “last common” package.

There is an issue that solves this (adding temporarily the Pharo5 repo).

Marcus