From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: greened@obbligato.org (David A. Greene) Subject: Re: git-subtree Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2012 16:07:59 -0600 Message-ID: <87aa56kvr4.fsf@smith.obbligato.org> References: <87ipkq199w.fsf@smith.obbligato.org> <20120105154740.GA11475@sigill.intra.peff.net> <87zke2yv27.fsf@smith.obbligato.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Ramkumar Ramachandra , David Greene , git@vger.kernel.org To: Jeff King X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon Jan 30 07:40:55 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Rrkv8-000292-F2 for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Mon, 30 Jan 2012 07:40:54 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752253Ab2A3Gku (ORCPT ); Mon, 30 Jan 2012 01:40:50 -0500 Received: from c-75-73-20-8.hsd1.mn.comcast.net ([75.73.20.8]:52300 "EHLO smith.obbligato.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751694Ab2A3Gkt (ORCPT ); Mon, 30 Jan 2012 01:40:49 -0500 X-Greylist: delayed 5397 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Mon, 30 Jan 2012 01:40:49 EST Received: from greened by smith.obbligato.org with local (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1Rrcul-0005Wa-OW; Sun, 29 Jan 2012 16:07:59 -0600 In-Reply-To: <87zke2yv27.fsf@smith.obbligato.org> (David A. Greene's message of "Thu, 05 Jan 2012 10:26:40 -0600") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.3 (gnu/linux) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: greened@obbligato.org (David A. Greene) writes: >> I'd favor keeping the history and doing the munge-overlay thing. > > Ok, that sounds fine to me. I'll do that in a private branch. What > should I send as patches to the mailing list? I'm assuming we don't > want [PATCH 235/12342], etc. sent to the list chronicling the entire > history. :) > >> Although part of me wants to join the histories in a subtree so that we >> can use "git subtree" to do it (which would just be cool), > > Heh. I thought about that too. :) I actually did end up doing a subtree merge via git subtree. It was more convenient to put it in contrib/ like that as almost everthing there is in its own subdirectory. I'm cleaning things up there to remove redundancy, rewrite tests (using earlier work), etc. What number should I use for git-subtree tests? Here are some logical candidates: 5 - the pull and exporting commands 6 - the revision tree commands (even e.g. merge-base) 7 - the porcelainish commands concerning the working tree 9 - the git tools git-subtree can pull and export. It also affects revision trees (it merges, for example) and is a porcelainish command that affects the working tree. It is also a "git tool" of a sort. I originally put them under t97XX but now that is taken, as is everything up to and including t99XX. Anyone have a strong opinion? Thanks! -Dave