On Mon, Feb 18, 2019 at 1:19 AM Tim Mackinnon <tim@testit.works> wrote:

Hey Ben - I��m not sure that this actually does the same thing. I just tried it now, and it resulted in an extra merge in my forked repo - as I think this effectively pulls down from upstream into pharo and then if you have any differences in your local image copy they might cause some changes which then you would push back into your fork origin.

If you just want a verbatim copy in your fork - you have to resort the command line?

Ah! well merging may do two things:

��- create a merge commit (in case of diverging history)

��- do a fast forward (just update your branch)

The thing is that you want to **undo** your changes before merging, otherwise you'll have a dangling commit there that you did not want :).

You cannot do that from Iceberg's UI right now, you can do it from any expression evaluator:

"Rough equivalent of reset --hard HEAD~1"

repository branch commit: repository branch commit parent.

But even then, Iceberg does not (yet) implement push --force, because we never found a useful use case (other than bad practices) to it.

This is important: if you have made changes to your repository, then "making a verbatim copy" means to undo your changes.

Even from the command line, what you may want to do is: move to another branch, remove your "to-sync" branch, fetch from origin, checkout origin/"to-sync", push force to your fork. But you may lose your changes...

I��m still mulling this over - as would you then pull from your upstream fork and still get the same differences that you would then apply? I��m not sure now - but if the idea was just to get yourself back into a consistent state - Its not clear to me how you can get all 3 copies saying the same thing in pharo?

Tim

On 16 Feb 2019, at 06:19, Ben Coman <btc@openInWorld.com> wrote:

On Sat, 16 Feb 2019 at 02:06, Tim Mackinnon <tim@testit.works> wrote:
Hi guys - I��ve spent a few hours scratching my head trying to understand why some of my Pull Requests to a project I had forked kept showing my previous commits when I thought I was all caught up.

It suddenly dawned on me, that when I had forked, and then done some work and then submitted a PR, and then applied it upstream that my fork is now no longer in sync with its upstream counterpart.

Having not done this in ages, it took me a while to then realise I have to do some git stuff to get it back in sync e.g. (and I think I��ve got this right)

git fetch upstream (or whatever name you gave it)
Git checkout master
Git merge upstream/master

So I guess my question is - wouldn��t it be helpful if this was a command in Iceberg? It seems quite common to fork a project (I think this is still recommended for pharo itself isn��t it?) - and then at some point you need to catchup with that origin again? Or am I missing something? I guess lots of stuff can go wrong - but if it does - you��d still get the same problems on the command line. It just seems that for normal situations - it would be handy to run this straight in Pharo.

I'm not fully-conversant with Iceberg, but if I guess right...
in Iceberg, right-click a repo and open its "Repository" window.
In the top-right click the "Add remote" button, to add the upstream repo.
That button is a bit hidden there.�� It might be nice to have it as a menu item on "Remotes" in the first pane.
Then click the <Merge> button, then select the upstream master branch and you should be up to date.

cheers -ben

��	Guille Polito Research Engineer Centre de Recherche en Informatique, Signal et Automatique de Lille CRIStAL - UMR 9189 French National Center for Scientific Research - http://www.cnrs.fr Web: http://guillep.github.io Phone: +33 06 52 70 66 13