From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: greened@obbligato.org Subject: Re: git-subtree Next Round Ready Date: Sun, 01 Apr 2012 13:00:58 -0500 Message-ID: <87mx6v49id.fsf@smith.obbligato.org> References: <87398we3ox.fsf@smith.obbligato.org> <7vobrgs5tb.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: git@vger.kernel.org To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sun Apr 01 20:04:56 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 1SEP95-0006kG-ID for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Sun, 01 Apr 2012 20:04:55 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751769Ab2DASEu (ORCPT ); Sun, 1 Apr 2012 14:04:50 -0400 Received: from li209-253.members.linode.com ([173.255.199.253]:38806 "EHLO johnson.obbligato.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751266Ab2DASEt (ORCPT ); Sun, 1 Apr 2012 14:04:49 -0400 Received: from c-75-73-20-8.hsd1.mn.comcast.net ([75.73.20.8] helo=smith.obbligato.org) by johnson.obbligato.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1SELQ9-00079Y-AZ; Sun, 01 Apr 2012 09:06:17 -0500 In-Reply-To: <7vobrgs5tb.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> (Junio C. Hamano's message of "Wed, 28 Mar 2012 15:45:36 -0700") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.3 (gnu/linux) X-Filter-Spam-Score: () X-Filter-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "johnson.obbligato.org", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see @@CONTACT_ADDRESS@@ for details. Content preview: Junio C Hamano writes: > I do not see the point of your subtree branch, especially after 1f30551 > (Set TEST_DIRECTORY, 2012-03-20) where it starts depending on files > outside its top-level directory. At that point, the tree ceases to be > viable as a standalone project. [...] Content analysis details: (1.4 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -1.0 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts onl Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Junio C Hamano writes: > I do not see the point of your subtree branch, especially after 1f30551 > (Set TEST_DIRECTORY, 2012-03-20) where it starts depending on files > outside its top-level directory. At that point, the tree ceases to be > viable as a standalone project. The point of the branch was to provide an easy reference to subtree merge into the main git repository. I have no intention of keeping a separate git-subtree project. > I think it would make more sense, from the history viewpoint, to: > > - Stop the history of the "subtree" branch at commit d3a04e0 (Use Test > Harness, 2012-01-29); > > - Create "for-upstream" branch that is a fork of 1.7.10 (when tagged); > > - On "for-upstream" branch, add all the files from d3a04e0 (Use Test > Harness, 2012-01-29) to contrib/subtree, and record it as a merge > between 1.7.10 and d3a04e0 (you can use subtree merge for this); and > finally > > - Replay the commits between d3a04e0 and the tip of your current > "subtree" branch on top of "for-upstream". > > And then have me pull the "for-upstream" branch. Ok, that sounds fine to me. > Further development after that point can continue in-tree just like any > other contrib subsystems like "completion/" and "fast-import/git-p4". Yep, sounds good! -Dave