From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Yann Dirson Subject: Re: StGIT: "stg new" vs "stg new --force" Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 22:57:52 +0100 Message-ID: <20060117215752.GH32585@nowhere.earth> References: <1137144291.20073.104.camel@dv> <1137517300.20556.26.camel@dv> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Catalin Marinas , git , Charles Lever X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Jan 17 22:54:48 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Eyymo-0003IJ-T4 for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Tue, 17 Jan 2006 22:54:43 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932285AbWAQVyj (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Jan 2006 16:54:39 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932438AbWAQVyj (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Jan 2006 16:54:39 -0500 Received: from smtp1-g19.free.fr ([212.27.42.27]:46285 "EHLO smtp1-g19.free.fr") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932285AbWAQVyj (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Jan 2006 16:54:39 -0500 Received: from nan92-1-81-57-214-146 (nan92-1-81-57-214-146.fbx.proxad.net [81.57.214.146]) by smtp1-g19.free.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6EC316E8E0; Tue, 17 Jan 2006 22:54:32 +0100 (CET) Received: from dwitch by nan92-1-81-57-214-146 with local (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Eyypt-0006OI-An; Tue, 17 Jan 2006 22:57:53 +0100 To: Pavel Roskin Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1137517300.20556.26.camel@dv> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Tue, Jan 17, 2006 at 12:01:40PM -0500, Pavel Roskin wrote: > Hello, Catalin! > > On Mon, 2006-01-16 at 08:18 +0000, Catalin Marinas wrote: > > On 13/01/06, Pavel Roskin wrote: > > > 1) "stg new --force" becomes "stg new" and "stg new" becomes "stg new > > > --empty", i.e. empty files can only be created with the "--empty" > > > switch. > > > 2) "stg new --force" becomes "stg record" or something. > > > 3) "stg new --force" becomes "stg new --record" or something. > > > 4) "stg new" works both with and without modified files. > > > > Regarding (1), the newly created patch is empty anyway, you would need > > to run 'refresh' to add the modified patches to it ('stg series -e' > > would show the empty patches prefixed with a 0). > > I was going to suggest that would be logical to run "stg refresh" > implicitly if "stg new" is used on modified files. But then I realized > that it would be even better if future versions of StGIT allowed to > refresh (i.e. add changes to) patches other that the current one. In > this case, indeed, you don't want the newly created patch to suck in all > the changes in the local repository. I commonly also feel the need to "stg refresh" only part of the current changes. Allowing to limit the files to be impacted by a refresh could be a good addition. It would even be useful sometimes to dispatch changes to a single file into several patches. When they are distinct enough to be in different diff hunks, it is pretty easy to split an existing patch, but it could also be useful to only refresh a patch with specific diff hunks. A possibility would be to add a filterdiff-like "-#" flag, in addition to the above-suggested "refresh " (and possibly only allow to specify a single file together with this flag). Best regards, -- Yann Dirson | Debian-related: | Support Debian GNU/Linux: | Freedom, Power, Stability, Gratis http://ydirson.free.fr/ | Check