[Newbies] how do I get a change lost from all change sets back into a valid change set?

[David Mitchell]

I think most everyone is just using Monticello (or Monticello 2).

On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 1:26 PM, Greg A. Woods; Planix, Inc.
<woods at planix.ca> wrote:
>
> On 20-Nov-2008, at 10:48 AM, Matthew Fulmer wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Nov 19, 2008 at 05:15:00PM -0500, Greg A. Woods; Planix, Inc.
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> How do I get a change lost from all change sets back into a valid
>>> change set?  I made a change in a method in an existing system class,
>>> but the change was done in a project and so showed up initially in the
>>> project's change set and somehow in messing around relearning how to
>>> use the change set sorter and the versions browser I managed to remove
>>> the change from the project change set and now it doesn't appear in
>>> any change set.  The versions button when viewing the method still
>>> shows the changes though.
>>
>> right-click on the method in the browser (or a category or a
>> class). Somewhere in the menu is "add to current change set"
>
> Yes, it's in the cascaded "more..." context menu (middle/yellow button) from
> the method name in a method pane!  Thanks! I knew there had to be a proper
> way to do this but I somehow missed this menu item in my frantic search for
> a solution yesterday.
>
>>> Also how do I _really_ remove intermediate changes from the versions
>>> of a method?  I don't want all my intermediate changes to be kept any
>>> more -- just the original and my final version.  The "remove from
>>> changes" menu doesn't do what I thought it would (which is probably
>>> how I made the whole set of versions for the method disappear entirely
>>> from the one and only change set it appeared in)
>>
>> Smalltalk condenseChanges
>
> Yeah, that's a little too much overkill as Chris else mentioned.
>
> I'm surprised there's still no easier way to collapse some intermediate
> changes on individual methods (or even whole classes and/or projects).  In
> the version control / SCM world it seems to me this is a quite common
> request; though it is one that's not always handled so well by more
> primitive systems.
>
> Certainly for whole projects the file-out/file-in method Dave describes is
> probably still the most complete and correct.  However for trivial fixes to
> one or two methods this seems overkill.
>
> On the other hand maybe I just need to adjust my paradigm for versioning
> many things a bit more to be in line with the current state of the art in
> Squeak.
>
> How do folks propose small changes or fixes for Smalltalk these days?  I'm
> still very much entrenched in the diff/patch world of CVS and similar
> systems.  I'm used to looking at diffs to understand changes, and I like to
> read them directly in e-mail, not have to dive into the programming
> environment / IDE / emacs or whatever and then perform multiple operations
> just to then view the change inside the the IDE, no matter how much more
> powerful the IDE presentation of the change might be.
>
> I am looking forward to learning to use Monticello to see if it really does
> do the kinds of things I think it should do for full SCM within Squeak.
>
> --
>                                        Greg A. Woods; Planix, Inc.
>                                        <woods at planix.ca>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Beginners mailing list
> Beginners at lists.squeakfoundation.org
> http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/beginners
>
>