From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
To: "SZEDER Gábor" <szeder@ira.uka.de>
Cc: Christian Couder <christian.couder@gmail.com>,
Christian Couder <chriscool@tuxfamily.org>,
git@vger.kernel.org, Ramkumar Ramachandra <artagnon@gmail.com>,
Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [BUG] multi-commit cherry-pick messes up the order of commits
Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2012 11:53:29 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120112165329.GA17173@sigill.intra.peff.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120112144409.GV30469@goldbirke>
On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 03:44:09PM +0100, SZEDER Gábor wrote:
> > Thanks for the very detailed report!
> >
> > I didn't test nor even compiled anything but maybe this can be fixed
> > by adding something like:
> >
> > opts->revs->topo_order = 1;
> >
> > in parse_args() or in prepare_revs()
> >
> > I will try to have a look tonight.
>
> [Beware, I'm mostly clueless about git internals.]
>
> I don't think that any commit reordering, whether it's based on
> committer date, topology, or whatever, is acceptable. Commits must be
> picked in the exact order they are specified on the command line.
I thought the multi-commit cherry-pick was supposed to take arbitrary
revision arguments, so you can do:
git cherry-pick master..topic
and likewise you can spell it:
git cherry-pick topic ^master
or:
git cherry-pick ^master topic
So the order of arguments isn't relevant in those cases; the graph
ordering is. I agree it would be nice to make:
git cherry-pick commit1 commit3 commit2
work in the order specified, but how does that interact with existing
cases that provide more traditional revision arguments?
-Peff
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-01-12 16:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-01-11 17:31 [BUG] multi-commit cherry-pick messes up the order of commits SZEDER Gábor
2012-01-12 13:31 ` Christian Couder
2012-01-12 14:44 ` SZEDER Gábor
2012-01-12 16:35 ` Ramkumar Ramachandra
2012-01-12 16:53 ` Jeff King [this message]
2012-01-12 17:09 ` Ramkumar Ramachandra
2012-01-12 17:14 ` Ramkumar Ramachandra
2012-01-12 17:15 ` Jeff King
2012-01-12 17:26 ` Ramkumar Ramachandra
2012-01-12 17:50 ` [PATCH] cherry-pick: add failing test for out-of-order pick Ramkumar Ramachandra
2012-01-12 18:32 ` Jonathan Nieder
2012-01-12 19:05 ` [PATCH v2] " Ramkumar Ramachandra
2012-01-12 19:33 ` Jonathan Nieder
2012-01-12 18:25 ` [BUG] multi-commit cherry-pick messes up the order of commits Junio C Hamano
2012-01-12 19:25 ` Ramkumar Ramachandra
2012-01-12 19:47 ` Jeff King
2012-01-12 20:11 ` Jonathan Nieder
2012-01-12 20:17 ` Jeff King
2012-01-12 20:11 ` Junio C Hamano
2012-01-12 19:21 ` Johannes Sixt
2012-01-12 19:29 ` Ramkumar Ramachandra
2012-01-12 19:34 ` Jonathan Nieder
2012-01-12 17:47 ` Jonathan Nieder
2012-01-12 18:41 ` Junio C Hamano
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=20120112165329.GA17173@sigill.intra.peff.net \
--to=peff@peff.net \
--cc=artagnon@gmail.com \
--cc=chriscool@tuxfamily.org \
--cc=christian.couder@gmail.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=jrnieder@gmail.com \
--cc=szeder@ira.uka.de \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).