Skip to content

[MRG+1] use union merge strategy for whats_new #7896

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Nov 17, 2016

Conversation

amueller
Copy link
Member

This should get rid of many merge conflicts in whats_new.rst.
See discussion here: #7709 (comment)

@GaelVaroquaux GaelVaroquaux changed the title use union merge strategy for whats_new [MRG+1] use union merge strategy for whats_new Nov 16, 2016
@GaelVaroquaux
Copy link
Member

LGTM. +1 for merge

@jnothman
Copy link
Member

Certainly doesn't hurt to try! +1

@lesteve
Copy link
Member

lesteve commented Nov 17, 2016

Simpler use case is something like this:

cat > mine <<EOF
An addition in mine.
And some more text.

This is the base I am not sure what so say here.

Second line with an additional paragraph. This is a long description
on some issue I once reported and fixed.
EOF

cat > base <<EOF
This is the base I am not sure what so say here.

Second line with an additional paragraph. This is a long description
on some issue I once reported and fixed.
EOF

cat > remote <<EOF
An addition in remote.

This is the base I am not sure what so say here.

Second line with an additional paragraph. This is a long description
on some issue I once reported and fixed.
EOF

git merge-file --union mine base remote
cat mine

Output:

An addition in mine.
And some more text.
An addition in remote.

This is the base I am not sure what so say here.

Second line with an additional paragraph. This is a long description
on some issue I once reported and fixed.

Not sure whether the lack of a new line between the two sections could be a problem. I tried more complicated scenarios that can lead to duplicated log entries (e.g. mine changes something in the last paragraph that remote changes too).

I think this is worth trying though, maybe with some light monitoring of whats_new.rst.

@amueller
Copy link
Member Author

yeah we need to monitor whatsnew, but we gotta do this anyhow. Merging as we have +2, and let's see where it goes.

@amueller amueller merged commit ba73010 into scikit-learn:master Nov 17, 2016
sergeyf pushed a commit to sergeyf/scikit-learn that referenced this pull request Feb 28, 2017
Sundrique pushed a commit to Sundrique/scikit-learn that referenced this pull request Jun 14, 2017
NelleV pushed a commit to NelleV/scikit-learn that referenced this pull request Aug 11, 2017
paulha pushed a commit to paulha/scikit-learn that referenced this pull request Aug 19, 2017
maskani-moh pushed a commit to maskani-moh/scikit-learn that referenced this pull request Nov 15, 2017
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants