SpM notes my version

[tianranc]

I'm creating a new version of SpM notes to change some of the notations (to match the variables used in the code) and to relabel some of the sections. This new version is still in working progress.

The original version is kept.

[egull]

Yes, looks good! Do you want to keep the section 4 on modification for a norm constraint or just delete it? We don't use it...

[tianranc]

Hi Emanuel, I would like to keep that section for now. Still working on the new version, will submit another few commits later. Thanks, Tianran

…

On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 8:45 AM, Emanuel Gull ***@***.***> wrote: ***@***.**** approved this pull request. Yes, looks good! Do you want to keep the section 4 on modification for a norm constraint or just delete it? We don't use it... — You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#35 (review)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AMEGcehsBawP8N0W3KfXu8RmQgyYS6f6ks5sfpP_gaJpZM4PMaIx> .

[egull]

Would you like me to merge it or do you want to keep working on it?

[tianranc]

I'm still working on it! A quick question: in the notes we use "u" the whole time (the correspondence for other updates is w prime). In the code, however, we switch to "u prime". Is it simply a notation change? If so, I will change the "u" in the notes to "u prime" to match the code. Thanks, Tianran

…

On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 12:38 PM, Emanuel Gull ***@***.***> wrote: Would you like me to merge it or do you want to keep working on it? — You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#35 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AMEGcVPQJci6nXGpvnj07ojM-YwUYtvdks5shWIJgaJpZM4PMaIx> .

[tianranc]

Emanuel,

I tried to cherry-pick another earlier commit 7cae056, but it says there's a conflict:
src/SpM_simulation.cpp, where the conflict lies in the iteration number of simulation. I'm not quite sure how the conflict occurs? The only thing I found is that the iteration number in my commit 7cae056 is different than your commit c81bf6f. Is that how this conflict happens?

But when I look at the command lines to resolve conflicts, I'm confused:
git checkout -b tianranc-HiroshiMethod HiroshiMethod
git pull https://github.com/tianranc/Maxent.git HiroshiMethod
git checkout HiroshiMethod
git merge --no-ff tianranc-HiroshiMethod
git push origin HiroshiMethod

Are those bold HiroshiMethod from upstream or my own forked repo? If from my forked repo, then it just creates a new branch with the latest HiroshiMethod from my forked repo, merges the new branch into old local HiroshiMethod and finally updates remote HirsohiMethod in my forked repo. How does this resolve the conflict? I guess this goes back to my question of the conflict is between which and which?

Tianran

[tianranc]

Sorry, I accidentally bolded all the HirsohiMethod. The one I have question about is the first: is it from upstream or my forked repo?

git checkout -b tianranc-HiroshiMethod HiroshiMethod
git pull https://github.com/tianranc/Maxent.git HiroshiMethod
git checkout HiroshiMethod
git merge --no-ff tianranc-HiroshiMethod
git push origin HiroshiMethod

[tianranc]

Problem solved. I just created a new pull request#45, with the commit I'd like to merge. Please ignore my two messages this morning as well this old pull request#35.

[egull]

OK! Your pull request should be merged. Thanks for figuring this out, I just got confused by your messages :-) Emanuel

…

On Jul 24, 2018, at 11:11 PM, Tianran Chen ***@***.***> wrote: Problem solved. I just created a new pull request#45, with the commit I'd like to merge. Please ignore my two messages this morning as well this old pull request#35. — You are receiving this because your review was requested. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#35 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AG29RU5CTuAusN4nAa_Z-q-OHogd4dRjks5uJ-HPgaJpZM4PMaIx>.