RE: git-svn set-tree bug

["Joakim Tjernlund" <joakim.tjernlund@transmode.se>]

 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Steven Grimm [mailto:koreth@midwinter.com] 
> Sent: den 11 juni 2007 01:37
> To: Joakim Tjernlund
> Cc: 'Eric Wong'; 'git'
> Subject: Re: git-svn set-tree bug
> 
> Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> > Is there a way to tell set-tree to commit the whole "merge" branch
> > as one svn commit?
> > If I merge the latest kernel into my tree there will
> > be a lot of commits that I don't want in svn.
> >   
> 
> You want a "squash" merge. Something like this:
> 
> git checkout -b tempbranch origin/svn-branch-to-commit-merge-to
> git merge --squash branch-with-commits-you-want-to-merge
> git commit
> git svn dcommit
> 
> The "merge" command will merge in the changes but will not commit 
> anything; when you do the explicit "commit" command 
> afterwards, you get 
> the contents of the merge but from git's point of view it's just a 
> regular commit so git-svn doesn't get confused.
> 
> After you do git svn dcommit, you may want to edit 
> .git/info/grafts to 
> tell git after the fact that this commit was a merge. It won't hurt 
> git-svn at that point and it will mean you can do another merge later 
> without git getting confused about what has already been merged.
> 
> Take a look at the script I posted a while back, which does something 
> similar:
> 
> http://www.spinics.net/lists/git/msg29119.html
> 

Hi Steven

That looks promising, especially Junos comment about making git-svn
able to deal with merges. Eric, do you feel this is doable?

 Jocke