From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Lykrg-00054t-TC for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 28 Apr 2009 06:48:40 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Lykrc-00054R-Aw for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 28 Apr 2009 06:48:40 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=44794 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Lykrc-00054O-7w for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 28 Apr 2009 06:48:36 -0400 Received: from gecko.sbs.de ([194.138.37.40]:21038) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Lykrb-0007kt-Mz for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 28 Apr 2009 06:48:36 -0400 Message-ID: <49F6DEFB.9090106@siemens.com> Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2009 12:48:27 +0200 From: Jan Kiszka MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: updating git tree References: <761ea48b0904272354w3267b367hb62ee873b5e50a29@mail.gmail.com> <200904281049.54617.Christoph.Egger@amd.com> <49F6CE81.7040809@siemens.com> <49F6D493.9050806@redhat.com> <49F6D880.1060409@siemens.com> <49F6DA48.4070000@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <49F6DA48.4070000@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Kevin Wolf Cc: Laurent Desnogues , Christoph Egger , "C.W. Betts" , qemu-devel@nongnu.org Kevin Wolf wrote: > Jan Kiszka schrieb: >> Kevin Wolf wrote: >>> Jan Kiszka schrieb: >>>> If you have non-trivial changes pending, probably in multiple commits, I >>>> can only recommend using stgit (or guilt) to compensate the missing >>>> patch queue feature of git. It allows you to easily navigate back and >>>> forth in your patch queues before finally posting them. >>> I haven't used these yet. Is there a real benefit compared to using a >>> normal git branch and rebase -i? Maybe I should try them if so. >> I'm not only talking about rebasing, also about working within your >> patch queue, editing patches in their middle, splitting it up, >> reordering it etc. There are surely ways to do this with native git >> (stgit is just a front-end and uses normal git), but that's not done >> with two or three git commands. > > This is why I said rebase -i and not only rebase. In case you don't know > this yet: It presents you a list of all commits you did since the point > you're rebasing on. You can then drop, merge, edit (which includes > splitting, see the man page of git-rebase) and change the order of them. It still lacks the flexibility and consistency of stgit-managed series as it is designed around the original "rebase" step. With stgit, you are permanently in "rebase -i" mode, you can go back and forth _while_ editing. You can switch branches without leaving the rebase mode. You can also hide patches temporarily (how do you do this with rebase -i?). However, in the end it is a question how you set up your personal workflow. There are n ways to skin a cat. Jan -- Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT SE 2 Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux