From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andreas Ericsson Subject: Re: n-heads and patch dependency chains Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2006 10:50:44 +0200 Message-ID: <44489CE4.1050101@op5.se> References: <4430D352.4010707@vilain.net> <7vsloucuxk.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <4431B60E.3030008@vilain.net> <44323C52.2030803@op5.se> <44325CDB.2000101@op5.se> <1145556505.5314.149.camel@cashmere.sps.mot.com> <7v4q0oyt3w.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Apr 21 10:51:00 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FWrLl-0005YJ-Uf for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Fri, 21 Apr 2006 10:50:50 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750867AbWDUIur (ORCPT ); Fri, 21 Apr 2006 04:50:47 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750913AbWDUIur (ORCPT ); Fri, 21 Apr 2006 04:50:47 -0400 Received: from linux-server1.op5.se ([193.201.96.2]:13527 "EHLO smtp-gw1.op5.se") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750866AbWDUIuq (ORCPT ); Fri, 21 Apr 2006 04:50:46 -0400 Received: from [192.168.1.20] (host-213.88.215.14.addr.se.sn.net [213.88.215.14]) by smtp-gw1.op5.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1FA156BCC0; Fri, 21 Apr 2006 10:50:45 +0200 (CEST) User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.7-1.1.fc4 (X11/20050929) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en To: Junio C Hamano In-Reply-To: <7v4q0oyt3w.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Junio C Hamano wrote: > Jon Loeliger writes: > > >>On Tue, 2006-04-04 at 06:47, Andreas Ericsson wrote: >> >> >>>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. > > > To be consistent, I think the result should be "as if the change > was commited only to the topic-branch and then the topic-branch > was *merged* into the testing-branch", since you start your > testing branch as "being the result of several merged topic-branches". > > I do that (manually) all the time, with: > > $ git checkout next > $ hack hack hack > > $ git checkout -m one/topic > $ git commit -o this-path that-path > $ git checkout next > $ git pull . one/topic > > Giving a short-hand for the last four-command sequence would > certainly be nice. > Ah. That's easier than what I originally looked at doing. > >>I am your number one fan! If I finish reading these 600+ >>messages, will I find out you have already implemented it, >>it's committed, and you just need me to test it now? :-) > > > Likewise... ;-) > Sorry to disappoint you so far. I'll see if I can turn up my shell-skills a notch or two and get the hang of the commit-script enough to implement it. -- Andreas Ericsson andreas.ericsson@op5.se OP5 AB www.op5.se Tel: +46 8-230225 Fax: +46 8-230231