The original traceback is indicating that a file is claiming to come
from a revision which isn't in the history of the branch. (Roughly,
I'm not 100% sure on that.)
You're saying that 3.x is fine, I'm wondering if there is just a bad
revision in the history of 2.x that is being processed.
John
=:->
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Cygwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
...
> At the moment the branch situation is as follows: -
> lp:~openteachermaintainers/openteacher/2.x-broken <- the renamed
> version we used until the problems started -
> lp:~openteachermaintainers/openteacher/2.x (lp:openteacher/2.x) <-
> my local version pushed to the by the rename freed location. -
> lp:~openteachermaintainers/openteacher/3.x (was:
> lp:~openteachermaintainers/openteacher/trunk , is lp:openteacher
> and lp:openteacher/3.x) <- fine.
>
So is your newly pushed-up branch still broken?
The original traceback is indicating that a file is claiming to come
from a revision which isn't in the history of the branch. (Roughly,
I'm not 100% sure on that.)
You're saying that 3.x is fine, I'm wondering if there is just a bad
revision in the history of 2.x that is being processed.
John enigmail. mozdev. org/
=:->
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Cygwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://
iEYEARECAAYFAk5 VIUEACgkQJdeBCY SNAAPLrQCbBbLw/ 8PWcSDMKPgkdT94 nvhu o7GO6ZAv9qY73SG fetp
BUwAoJRBJ5LC/
=BcUC
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----