Comments (6)
ob
commented on May 22, 2024
Looking at the git history for the generated project, I see
% git log --oneline --graph
* af64a61 (HEAD) Merge pull request #1 from ob:ob-patch-1
|\
| * 21171d1 (refs/copybara_fetch/refs/pull/1/head) Update afile
| * 55cc1e4 Project import generated by Copybara.
| * 80b7e76 Project import generated by Copybara.
* d0b3be8 (copybara/resolvedPush-dacca1cc-cf6b-45dc-976c-189a5df3f5aa, refs/copybara_fetch/master) add somedir/.gitignore
* b4e91bd add some files
* 36eb4a9 Initial commit
Looking at the two tips of the commit history:
% git ls-tree -r d0b3be8
100644 blob 82f3a88e17b409ae206b19e55f5c5b23eb83bcc1 .gitignore
100644 blob 261eeb9e9f8b2b4b0d119366dda99c6fd7d35c64 LICENSE
100644 blob 0f19791fc0d465f4226ee44b07a50dbad869e493 README.md
100644 blob 86e041dad66a19b9518b83b78865015f62662f75 somedir/.gitignore
100644 blob 257cc5642cb1a054f08cc83f2d943e56fd3ebe99 somedir/afile
100644 blob 257cc5642cb1a054f08cc83f2d943e56fd3ebe99 somedir/bfile
which is the state of my SoT, and
% git ls-tree -r 21171d1
100644 blob 86e041dad66a19b9518b83b78865015f62662f75 .gitignore
100644 blob 3bd1f0e29744a1f32b08d5650e62e2e62afb177c afile
and the merge:
% git ls-tree -r af64a61
100644 blob 86e041dad66a19b9518b83b78865015f62662f75 .gitignore
100644 blob 3bd1f0e29744a1f32b08d5650e62e2e62afb177c afile
100644 blob 86e041dad66a19b9518b83b78865015f62662f75 somedir/.gitignore
100644 blob 3bd1f0e29744a1f32b08d5650e62e2e62afb177c somedir/afile
It's almost like the core.move() operation here is not removing the source files.
from copybara.
ob
commented on May 22, 2024
One thing to note when running this again with -v and reading the logs is this:
Executing [git '--git-dir=/Users/obonilla/copybara/cache/git_repos/https%3A%2F%2Fgithub%2Ecom%2Fob%2Fcb-sot%2Egit' '--work-tree=/Users/obonilla/copybara/temp/workdir606592250108702709/checkout' merge-base d0b3be83ebc842c8dd6feae051391d7a82adf9b8 21171d13a57703bae681c45dd57b2e76bffb1ab5]
Command 'git' finished in 00:00.011. Process exited with status 1
Not sure if that's related though...
from copybara.
mikelalcon
commented on May 22, 2024
Hi Oscar,
Sorry for the late reply.
The reason is a conflict with the labels because this is git to git (we
haven't used this much, we almost always use it for non-git to/from git).
The way to fix it is for your CHANGE_REQUEST workflow use:
destination = git.destination(
url = "https://github.com/ob/cb-sot",
fetch = "master",
integrates = [],
),
The default for integrates is to do a merge with the change
from COPYBARA_INTEGRATE_REVIEW. But in this case it is the change that we
are importing itself.
Note that integrates = [], should only be set in the CHANGE_REQUEST
one. The one from cb-sot -> cb-sot-public should rely on the default (and
have the same expose label).
…On Thu, Nov 14, 2019 at 5:29 PM Oscar Bonilla ***@***.***> wrote:
One thing to note when running this again with -v and reading the logs is
this:
Executing [git '--git-dir=/Users/obonilla/copybara/cache/git_repos/https%3A%2F%2Fgithub%2Ecom%2Fob%2Fcb-sot%2Egit' '--work-tree=/Users/obonilla/copybara/temp/workdir606592250108702709/checkout' merge-base d0b3be83ebc842c8dd6feae051391d7a82adf9b8 21171d13a57703bae681c45dd57b2e76bffb1ab5]
Command 'git' finished in 00:00.011. Process exited with status 1
Not sure if that's related though...
—
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#104?email_source=notifications&email_token=AAHJWQCPEE2WYM2K7276EYTQTXGK3A5CNFSM4JLJ6XHKYY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGOEEDQ6FI#issuecomment-554110741>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAHJWQDUUBDOYPCKZOV2RJ3QTXGK3ANCNFSM4JLJ6XHA>
.
from copybara.
ob
commented on May 22, 2024
No worries Mikel…
Maybe I’m not understanding the flow then. I tried adding the `integrates` attribute, and as you said, it fixed the merge problem but I’m not getting the behavior I expect.
What I’m trying to do is set up a workflow where I have an internal private git repo and an external public git repo. The private one has more than just the piece I’m moving to the public one, thus the `core.move()` calls.
The flow I want is an initial export of the history with some cleanups. Then the public one should become the SoT and the internal one would be more of a testing ground for public PRs.
Does that make sense? I’m having trouble understanding all the labels and attributes in the workflows and what they mean :-)
Thanks for your help!
… On Nov 14, 2019, at 8:02 PM, Mikel Alcon ***@***.***> wrote:
Hi Oscar,
Sorry for the late reply.
The reason is a conflict with the labels because this is git to git (we
haven't used this much, we almost always use it for non-git to/from git).
The way to fix it is for your CHANGE_REQUEST workflow use:
destination = git.destination(
url = "https://github.com/ob/cb-sot",
fetch = "master",
integrates = [],
),
The default for integrates is to do a merge with the change
from COPYBARA_INTEGRATE_REVIEW. But in this case it is the change that we
are importing itself.
Note that integrates = [], should only be set in the CHANGE_REQUEST
one. The one from cb-sot -> cb-sot-public should rely on the default (and
have the same expose label).
On Thu, Nov 14, 2019 at 5:29 PM Oscar Bonilla ***@***.***>
wrote:
> One thing to note when running this again with -v and reading the logs is
> this:
>
> Executing [git '--git-dir=/Users/obonilla/copybara/cache/git_repos/https%3A%2F%2Fgithub%2Ecom%2Fob%2Fcb-sot%2Egit' '--work-tree=/Users/obonilla/copybara/temp/workdir606592250108702709/checkout' merge-base d0b3be83ebc842c8dd6feae051391d7a82adf9b8 21171d13a57703bae681c45dd57b2e76bffb1ab5]
> Command 'git' finished in 00:00.011. Process exited with status 1
>
> Not sure if that's related though...
>
> —
> You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> <#104?email_source=notifications&email_token=AAHJWQCPEE2WYM2K7276EYTQTXGK3A5CNFSM4JLJ6XHKYY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGOEEDQ6FI#issuecomment-554110741>,
> or unsubscribe
> <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAHJWQDUUBDOYPCKZOV2RJ3QTXGK3ANCNFSM4JLJ6XHA>
> .
>
—
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe.
from copybara.
mikelalcon
commented on May 22, 2024
I see. Forget about the integrates then. For some reason I though your SoT
was the private repo.
Then you wouldn't need to use a CHANGE_REQUEST workflow (For now).
This is what I would setup:
1. One workflow from private -> public in ITERATIVE mode. You probably want
to use --ignore-noop. Throw away this workflow once the initial import is
done.
2. Once you have public ready, make public SoT (For public part of the repo)
3. Create an ITERATIVE or SQUASH workflow from public -> private.
git.origin -> git.destination. This will be in charge of importing
submitted code internally.
At this point you can work in the external repo and periodically import to
the internal repo. Now presubmits:
*Checking that external changes don't break internal:*
4. Configure an external -> internal workflow with mode
CHANGE_REQUEST_FROM_SOT. This will be git.github_pr_origin to
git.github_pr_destination. Don't merge this prs, use them for testing only
(we can do something about this later).
*Checking that internal changes don't break external and do changes to
external from internal:*
5. Configure an internal to external workflow using CHANGE_REQUEST mode.
use git.github_pr_origin to git.github_pr_destination. You don't submit in
the the internal repo. You merge/submit in the destination (External).
For 5) sometimes you need to do an incompatible change that needs to change
internal an external. You can chose between breaking the internal repo
temporarily or (What we usually do) when doing an import from step 3),
manually add the pending incompatible commits from internal.
I hope it helps!
On Fri, Nov 15, 2019 at 12:41 PM Oscar Bonilla <[email protected]>
wrote:
… No worries Mikel…
Maybe I’m not understanding the flow then. I tried adding the `integrates`
attribute, and as you said, it fixed the merge problem but I’m not getting
the behavior I expect.
What I’m trying to do is set up a workflow where I have an internal
private git repo and an external public git repo. The private one has more
than just the piece I’m moving to the public one, thus the `core.move()`
calls.
The flow I want is an initial export of the history with some cleanups.
Then the public one should become the SoT and the internal one would be
more of a testing ground for public PRs.
Does that make sense? I’m having trouble understanding all the labels and
attributes in the workflows and what they mean :-)
Thanks for your help!
> On Nov 14, 2019, at 8:02 PM, Mikel Alcon ***@***.***>
wrote:
>
> Hi Oscar,
>
> Sorry for the late reply.
>
> The reason is a conflict with the labels because this is git to git (we
> haven't used this much, we almost always use it for non-git to/from git).
>
> The way to fix it is for your CHANGE_REQUEST workflow use:
>
> destination = git.destination(
> url = "https://github.com/ob/cb-sot",
> fetch = "master",
> integrates = [],
> ),
>
> The default for integrates is to do a merge with the change
> from COPYBARA_INTEGRATE_REVIEW. But in this case it is the change that we
> are importing itself.
>
> Note that integrates = [], should only be set in the CHANGE_REQUEST
> one. The one from cb-sot -> cb-sot-public should rely on the default (and
> have the same expose label).
>
> On Thu, Nov 14, 2019 at 5:29 PM Oscar Bonilla ***@***.***>
> wrote:
>
> > One thing to note when running this again with -v and reading the logs
is
> > this:
> >
> > Executing [git
'--git-dir=/Users/obonilla/copybara/cache/git_repos/https%3A%2F%2Fgithub%2Ecom%2Fob%2Fcb-sot%2Egit'
'--work-tree=/Users/obonilla/copybara/temp/workdir606592250108702709/checkout'
merge-base d0b3be83ebc842c8dd6feae051391d7a82adf9b8
21171d13a57703bae681c45dd57b2e76bffb1ab5]
> > Command 'git' finished in 00:00.011. Process exited with status 1
> >
> > Not sure if that's related though...
> >
> > —
> > You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
> > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> > <
#104?email_source=notifications&email_token=AAHJWQCPEE2WYM2K7276EYTQTXGK3A5CNFSM4JLJ6XHKYY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGOEEDQ6FI#issuecomment-554110741
>,
> > or unsubscribe
> > <
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAHJWQDUUBDOYPCKZOV2RJ3QTXGK3ANCNFSM4JLJ6XHA
>
> > .
> >
> —
> You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe.
>
—
You are receiving this because you commented.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#104?email_source=notifications&email_token=AAHJWQB44YEN7A7WZULKWGDQT3NLRA5CNFSM4JLJ6XHKYY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGOEEGFTZA#issuecomment-554457572>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAHJWQDAK6722BMUGK64PO3QT3NLRANCNFSM4JLJ6XHA>
.
from copybara.
mikelalcon
commented on May 22, 2024
Hi Oscar, did it work for you?
from copybara.
Related Issues (20)
- Reuse existing local git repos rather than each run performing a git clone HOT 1
- Possible to merge/combine files?
- Creating a PR on the destination isn't working
- Examples of custom transformations? HOT 2
- Raising PR from one SoT repo to multiple destination repos HOT 1
- PR cannot be found when `--github-use-repo` is specified. HOT 2
- Is it safe to use experimental_custom_rev_id ? HOT 5
- maintain git history but remove commits in which no origin files are present HOT 1
- best way to handle gradually open-sourcing multiple parts of a repo? HOT 1
- Why 'user.name' and/or 'user.email' must be configured ? HOT 7
- Passing a Variable to copybara.sky in Dockerized Copybara HOT 2
- Initial import of existing repo and ITERATIVE mode usage question HOT 3
- Compiling Copybara through Bazel HOT 1
- Calling different sky files from copy.bara.sky HOT 4
- Submodules appear as regular directories HOT 1
- Package for Homebrew
- Add version tags to the repo to signal packagers that the software is stable
- What is the difference between uberjar and ordinary build?
- Compile standalone binary
- lfs support for git.destination
Recommend Projects
-
React
A declarative, efficient, and flexible JavaScript library for building user interfaces.
-
Vue.js
🖖 Vue.js is a progressive, incrementally-adoptable JavaScript framework for building UI on the web.
-
Typescript
TypeScript is a superset of JavaScript that compiles to clean JavaScript output.
-
TensorFlow
An Open Source Machine Learning Framework for Everyone
-
Django
The Web framework for perfectionists with deadlines.
-
Laravel
A PHP framework for web artisans
-
D3
Bring data to life with SVG, Canvas and HTML. 📊📈🎉
-
Recommend Topics
-
javascript
JavaScript (JS) is a lightweight interpreted programming language with first-class functions.
-
web
Some thing interesting about web. New door for the world.
-
server
A server is a program made to process requests and deliver data to clients.
-
Machine learning
Machine learning is a way of modeling and interpreting data that allows a piece of software to respond intelligently.
-
Visualization
Some thing interesting about visualization, use data art
-
Game
Some thing interesting about game, make everyone happy.
Recommend Org
-
Facebook
We are working to build community through open source technology. NB: members must have two-factor auth.
-
Microsoft
Open source projects and samples from Microsoft.
-
Google
Google ❤️ Open Source for everyone.
-
Alibaba
Alibaba Open Source for everyone
-
D3
Data-Driven Documents codes.
-
Tencent
China tencent open source team.
from copybara.