From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Uwe =?iso-8859-1?Q?Kleine-K=F6nig?= Subject: Re: (topgit question) deleting a dependency Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2009 20:48:51 +0200 Message-ID: <20090429184851.GA17286@pengutronix.de> References: <20090428094138.GB9415@piper.oerlikon.madduck.net> <20090428204018.GA17722@pengutronix.de> <20090429082410.GB18521@pengutronix.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: git@vger.kernel.org To: Sitaram Chamarty X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Apr 29 20:49:05 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1LzEq8-000899-Ie for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Wed, 29 Apr 2009 20:49:05 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753969AbZD2Ssx convert rfc822-to-quoted-printable (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Apr 2009 14:48:53 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752248AbZD2Ssx (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Apr 2009 14:48:53 -0400 Received: from metis.ext.pengutronix.de ([92.198.50.35]:47961 "EHLO metis.ext.pengutronix.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752693AbZD2Ssw (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Apr 2009 14:48:52 -0400 Received: from octopus.hi.pengutronix.de ([2001:6f8:1178:2:215:17ff:fe12:23b0]) by metis.ext.pengutronix.de with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1LzEpw-00076r-9N; Wed, 29 Apr 2009 20:48:52 +0200 Received: from ukl by octopus.hi.pengutronix.de with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1LzEpv-0004VE-5k; Wed, 29 Apr 2009 20:48:51 +0200 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 2001:6f8:1178:2:215:17ff:fe12:23b0 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: ukl@pengutronix.de X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on metis.ext.pengutronix.de); SAEximRunCond expanded to false X-PTX-Original-Recipient: git@vger.kernel.org Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Hello, > >> This is a little beyond my comprehension :( However, this > >> is also why I am limiting myself to > >>=20 > >> - a single level of dependencies in tg, (master --> > >> multiple t/something --> t/all), and > >>=20 > >> - no changes of its own in t/all > >>=20 > >> When any of the t/something graduates to master, t/all will > >> be blown away (safe, since it has no changes of its own) and >=20 > > What makes you think it will "be blown away"? Or alternatively, wh= at do >=20 > My mistake. I meant that I will blow it away myself, and > create a new one with the same name except it's list of deps > will exclude the one that graduated. >=20 > > you mean saying that? I often use the same approach and I never ha= d the > > feeling anything is blown away. If upstream uses your t/something = patch > > it just merges into t/something making it empty without changing th= e >=20 > How? When I update master from upstream and then tg update > on t/all? yes. I think it's even save to just remove empty dependencies (and add the dependencies of the patch branch to be deleted) from .topdeps. Best regards Uwe --=20 Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-K=F6nig = | Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.= de/ |