Git development
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Björn Steinbrink" <B.Steinbrink@gmx.de>
To: Peter Weseloh <peter.weseloh@googlemail.com>
Cc: Peter Weseloh <Peter.Weseloh@gmail.com>,
	Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>,
	git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: What is the best way to backport a feature?
Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2009 19:17:58 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20091129181758.GA9533@atjola.homenet> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4db3b0200911290941j42c5a0aaq2c6a9836b38066b2@mail.gmail.com>

On 2009.11.29 18:41:35 +0100, Peter Weseloh wrote:
> >  What's unusual there is that you merged from Mainline to Feature_A.
> > Usually, the history would look like this:
> >
> >   o--o--o                    Release_1.0
> >  /    \  \
> >  o-o-o--o--o-o-o-o-o-o---o--o Mainline
> >      \                 /
> >       F1-----F2------F3      Feature_A
> >
> > And then you could easily use rebase to get the job done.
> 
> But on the other hand the intermediate merges from the Mainline make for
> much simpler merges, right?.
> If merging is done only when Feature_A is ready it might become a real pain.

That's usually more often true with CVS or SVN than with git, but ...

> It might take several month to complete it and the mainline might have
> changed a lot.

... over such a long timeframe, yes, things might become ugly. OTOH such
a long timeframe might also mean that the topic branch actually does too
much. Splitting such a large thing into more manageable pieces would
help there, as you could merge completed topic branch to your mainline
branch earlier and more often.

> > Had you known beforehand that Feature_A is a candidate for backporting,
> > you would have even branch from an older commit like this:
> >
> >   o--o--o                    Release_1.0
> >  /    \  \
> >  o-o-o--o--o-o-o-o-o-o---o--o Mainline
> >  \                     /
> >   F1--------F2-------F3      Feature_A
> >
> > Then you could easily merge Feature_A to Release_1.0 as well, without
> > merging anything unrelated.
> >
> > But that's just for the future...
> >
> Yes, sure. If I would know the future already today I would not need to do
> any coding anymore :-)

I meant something like "I just said that, so you can avoid problems in
the future" ;-) But yeah, knowing beforehand that things should go into
a maintenance branch isn't common, unless it's about a bugfix.

> > Given you current history, you could use format-patch + am like this:
> >
> > git format-patch --stdout --first-parent Mainline..Feature_A > fa.mbox
> > git checkout Release_1.0
> > git am -3 fa.mbox
> >
> > The --first-parent options make it follow the first parent of the merge
> > commits only, so the whole stuff on the Mainline branch is ignored. And
> > you just get F1, F2 and F3 in fa.mbox, which you then apply using am.
> >
> >
> Ah, great! I played with format-patch + am but missed the '--first-parent'
> option. I will give it a try. Thanks a lot!

Well, it's a rev-list option, which might work by accident. Junio
recently said that the fact that format-patch accepts path limiting is
by accident, might be true for --first-parent as well... No clue. Junio?

Björn

  parent reply	other threads:[~2009-11-29 18:18 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-11-29 16:28 What is the best way to backport a feature? Peter Weseloh
2009-11-29 16:47 ` Björn Steinbrink
2009-11-29 16:52   ` Pascal Obry
     [not found]   ` <4db3b0200911290941j42c5a0aaq2c6a9836b38066b2@mail.gmail.com>
2009-11-29 17:45     ` Fwd: " Peter Weseloh
2009-11-29 18:33       ` Johannes Sixt
2009-11-29 19:03         ` Peter Weseloh
2009-11-29 18:17     ` Björn Steinbrink [this message]
2009-11-29 16:49 ` Pascal Obry
2009-11-29 17:02 ` Michael J Gruber
2009-11-30 19:08   ` Greg A. Woods

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20091129181758.GA9533@atjola.homenet \
    --to=b.steinbrink@gmx.de \
    --cc=Peter.Weseloh@gmail.com \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=gitster@pobox.com \
    --cc=peter.weseloh@googlemail.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox