On Wed, 2003-11-12 at 01:56, Jeffrey Yasskin wrote: > What's the "right" way to update our local arch branches to point to the > new version? First you need to create a new version, tag it from my version, and then get a working copy of the tree: tla archive-setup rhythmbox--mainline--0.7 tla tag walters@rhythmbox.org--2003b/rhythmbox--mainline--0.7 rhythmbox--mainline--0.7 tla get rhythmbox--mainline--0.7 rb-0.7 cd rb-0.7 Simple enough. Now at this point you likely want to apply any modifications you've made in your 0.6 branch. One thing about tla is that there are a lot of different ways to merge - that's because there is no one *right* way to do a merge all of the time. The simplest way to do the merge though, would be to say: tla replay rhythmbox--mainline--0.6 That will apply all the patches that are on your 0.6 branch and not in the working tree, in order. However, a different strategy would be to get all the changes on your 0.6 branch versus my 0.6 branch, and apply that as one huge changeset to your 0.7 branch: tla delta walters@rhythmbox.org--2003b/rhythmbox--mainline--0.6--patch-XXX rhythmbox--mainline--0.6--patch-YYY ,changes There, you should fill in patch-XXX with the patch number where your branched from, and patch-YYY with the patch number that's the latest on your 0.6 branch. 'delta' just computes the changeset, so now you need to apply it: tla dopatch ,changes . Some of this may at first seem too verbose, or too complex. But think - how would you do this with CVS or SVN? The answer basically is: you can't :) Not without a lot of pain anyways looking at merge dates and messing with 'diff' and 'patch'. However, the tla commands probably could be simpler. I have some ideas for that.
This is a digitally signed message part