svn commit: r439857 - head/Tools/scripts

[Adam Weinberger]

> On 30 Apr, 2017, at 21:23, Kubilay Kocak <koobs at FreeBSD.org> wrote:
> 
> On 5/1/17 11:06 AM, Adam Weinberger wrote:
>> Author: adamw Date: Mon May  1 01:06:15 2017 New Revision: 439857 
>> URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/ports/439857
>> 
>> Log: Add some usage instructions to the top of the mfh script. In
>> particular, note that multiple revisions should appear
>> chronologically.
>> 
>> Modified: head/Tools/scripts/mfh
>> 
>> Modified: head/Tools/scripts/mfh 
>> ==============================================================================
>> 
>> 
> --- head/Tools/scripts/mfh	Mon May  1 00:59:29 2017	(r439856)
>> +++ head/Tools/scripts/mfh	Mon May  1 01:06:15 2017	(r439857) @@ -1,6
>> +1,12 @@ #!/bin/sh # # mfh - Merge from head to a given branch +# +#
>> Usage: mfh [<branch>] <revnumber> [<revnumber>] +#   <branch> is
>> optional and defaults to latest branch +#   If supplying multiple
>> revnumbers, put them in chronological order +#     (111111 111112
>> 111113) +# # Copyright 2013 Baptiste Daroussin # All rights
>> reserved. #
>> 
> 
> What is the impact if they are not sorted?

If later commits depend on the previous commits, the later commits can't apply and are seen as merge conflicts.

> Could the script be made to sort the provided revision numbers,
> precluding the need for the committers to remember to sort them?

Absolutely. Is there any scenario where applying them in non-chronological order solves a problem? As long as the goal is to end up where HEAD is (or was), I can't see non-chronological being a good thing.

# Adam


-- 
Adam Weinberger
adamw at adamw.org
https://www.adamw.org