From: Andreas Ericsson <ae@op5.se>
To: Stephen Haberman <stephen@exigencecorp.com>
Cc: Johannes Sixt <j.sixt@viscovery.net>, git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: rebasing merges
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2008 11:11:29 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <48D8B2C1.5070800@op5.se> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080923040302.c4d0d33b.stephen@exigencecorp.com>
Stephen Haberman wrote:
>>> ---A--B--C--D <-- origin/stable
>>> \ |
>>> E--F | <-- origin/topica
>>> \ |
>>> g--h <-- topica
>>>
>>> All the upper case commits have been published to origin. Other
>>> devs, etc., know about them, their hashes are in the bug tracking
>>> system.
>>>
>>> I'm bringing topica up to date, but with a merge because I have
>>> published history already on topica, so I merge stable and get a
>>> new merge commit: g. And maybe make another change: h.
>>>
>> Why do you merge stable at this point?
>
> Good question--I appreciate the sanity check.
>
> I merged stable because we had a new release of the software. E.g.
> A=1.0, B=1.1, C=1.2, and finally D=1.3.
>
> So, topica is a new feature, "Add widgets/whatever", but it's not ready
> for stable (production) yet, so, yes, I think it is a topic branch.
>
> However, D=1.4 is now out the door, I've had two commits E and F on
> topica that I had already committed and pushed out for code review, our
> email list, and our bug tracker, and now, post-1.4, qa wants to see
> topica up and running to see if it's good enough to go into the next
> release.
>
> If our deployment guy pushes out F, qa is going to (and did) complain
> that they're not seeing the latest features from 1.4 in topica.
>
> As you said, integration testing.
>
> Okay, so I merge g, however, I really want to push it back out so that
> the deployment guy can push it to qa (he would rather not resolve my
> conflicts by making his own local g). And even if I did the deployment
> myself, locally against g, I would prefer to share g in case another
> dev working on the same topic gets feedback about funkiness from qa and
> would like to see the code as it is in qa. E.g.: g.
>
> I can appreciate that if I was doing integration testing all by myself,
> with only automated tests, I could throw g away. However, even then, I
> would prefer to push g out and let our integration server run the tests
> for me.
>
> Does this sound reasonable?
>
It sounds very reasonable indeed, but then I don't understand why you
held off pushing the merge.
That's beside the point though, as I firmly believe git should be more
helpful in this situation. If "git rebase -i -p" doesn't help you fix
the problems, I'll see what I can do to help.
--
Andreas Ericsson andreas.ericsson@op5.se
OP5 AB www.op5.se
Tel: +46 8-230225 Fax: +46 8-230231
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-09-23 9:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-09-22 20:57 rebasing merges Stephen Haberman
2008-09-23 4:19 ` Stephen Haberman
2008-09-23 6:09 ` Johannes Sixt
2008-09-23 7:30 ` Samuel Tardieu
2008-09-23 7:52 ` Johannes Sixt
2008-09-23 8:06 ` Andreas Ericsson
2008-09-23 7:46 ` Stephen Haberman
2008-09-23 8:00 ` Johannes Sixt
2008-09-23 8:20 ` Andreas Ericsson
2008-09-23 9:03 ` Stephen Haberman
2008-09-23 9:11 ` Andreas Ericsson [this message]
2008-09-23 9:30 ` Stephen Haberman
2008-09-23 18:29 ` Stephen Haberman
2008-09-23 11:16 ` SZEDER Gábor
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=48D8B2C1.5070800@op5.se \
--to=ae@op5.se \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=j.sixt@viscovery.net \
--cc=stephen@exigencecorp.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.