From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Catalin Marinas Subject: Re: Stacked GIT 0.3 (now more Quilt-like) Date: Sun, 03 Jul 2005 22:14:29 +0100 Message-ID: <1120425269.6845.28.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1119994003.9631.6.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1120385280.6845.12.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: GIT X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sun Jul 03 23:15:04 2005 Return-path: Received: from vger.kernel.org ([12.107.209.244]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DpBnT-00053X-7Z for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Sun, 03 Jul 2005 23:14:39 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261536AbVGCVOe (ORCPT ); Sun, 3 Jul 2005 17:14:34 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261538AbVGCVOe (ORCPT ); Sun, 3 Jul 2005 17:14:34 -0400 Received: from mta09-winn.ispmail.ntl.com ([81.103.221.49]:51833 "EHLO mta09-winn.ispmail.ntl.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261536AbVGCVOb (ORCPT ); Sun, 3 Jul 2005 17:14:31 -0400 Received: from aamta10-winn.ispmail.ntl.com ([81.103.221.35]) by mta09-winn.ispmail.ntl.com with ESMTP id <20050703211430.XTYK11649.mta09-winn.ispmail.ntl.com@aamta10-winn.ispmail.ntl.com>; Sun, 3 Jul 2005 22:14:30 +0100 Received: from cpc2-cmbg5-3-0-cust212.cmbg.cable.ntl.com ([81.104.193.212]) by aamta10-winn.ispmail.ntl.com with ESMTP id <20050703211430.WPFB23101.aamta10-winn.ispmail.ntl.com@cpc2-cmbg5-3-0-cust212.cmbg.cable.ntl.com>; Sun, 3 Jul 2005 22:14:30 +0100 To: Peter Osterlund In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Evolution 2.2.1.1 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Sun, 2005-07-03 at 14:38 +0200, Peter Osterlund wrote: > Catalin Marinas writes: > > I know that using -A gives a more detailed output in case of a conflict. > > The problem is that you will get a conflict even if the changes are > > identical, making it impossible to detect when a patch was merged > > upstream. > > OK, I see. How about using wiggle instead? > > http://cgi.cse.unsw.edu.au/~neilb/source/wiggle/ > > That's what patch-utils uses if you run "pushpatch -m". wiggle is also > a lot smarter than diff3, so there will be fewer cases that result in > a conflict. Maybe a parameter to "stg push" could enable wiggle mode. I haven't used wiggle before but I will give it a try (though I prefer such a tool not to be too smart since it might make mistakes). Anyway, I will make this configurable, i.e. you could put something like below in the .stgitrc file: merger = 'diff3 -m -E %(branch1)s %(ancestor)s %(branch2)s' or merger = 'wiggle -m %(branch1)s %(ancestor)s %(branch2)s' > Is there a way in StGIT to undo a push that results in a large mess of > conflicts? Good point. No, there isn't yet. I will think about an undo command. At the moment, the old top and bottom ids of a patch are saved so that the patch before the merge can be retrieved but there isn't any command to make use of them. -- Catalin