Re: n-heads and patch dependency chains

[Andreas Ericsson <ae@op5.se>]

Jakub Narebski wrote:
> Andreas Ericsson wrote:
> 
> 
>>Wouldn't "git commit -M -b topic", for committing to a different branch
>>than what is checked out (-b) and also to the checked out branch (-M)
>>have the same beneficial effects, but without the complexity of hydras
>>and patch dependency theory? It would only remove the cherry-pick stage
>>though, but perhaps it's good enough. Although when I think about it, -b
>><branch> for committing to another branch and -B <branch> for doing the
>>above probably makes more sense.
> 
> 
> Do you mean that you commit current state to the checked out (working)
> branch, and commit *changes* (i.e. apply patch) to a different branch?
> 

No, I mean that this would commit both to the testing branch (being the 
result of several merged topic-branches) and to the topic-branch merged 
in. Commit as in regular commit, with a commit-message and a patch. The 
resulting repository would be the exact same as if the change was 
committed only to the topic-branch and then cherry-picked on to the 
testing-branch.

-- 
Andreas Ericsson                   andreas.ericsson@op5.se
OP5 AB                             www.op5.se
Tel: +46 8-230225                  Fax: +46 8-230231