From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: [BUG] multi-commit cherry-pick messes up the order of commits Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2012 11:53:29 -0500 Message-ID: <20120112165329.GA17173@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <20120111173101.GQ30469@goldbirke> <20120112144409.GV30469@goldbirke> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: Christian Couder , Christian Couder , git@vger.kernel.org, Ramkumar Ramachandra , Jonathan Nieder To: SZEDER =?utf-8?B?R8OhYm9y?= X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Jan 12 17:53:53 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RlNuM-000388-Oc for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Thu, 12 Jan 2012 17:53:47 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754385Ab2ALQxe convert rfc822-to-quoted-printable (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Jan 2012 11:53:34 -0500 Received: from 99-108-226-0.lightspeed.iplsin.sbcglobal.net ([99.108.226.0]:36102 "EHLO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754325Ab2ALQxd (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Jan 2012 11:53:33 -0500 Received: (qmail 32572 invoked by uid 107); 12 Jan 2012 17:00:27 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) (smtp-auth username relayok, mechanism cram-md5) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with ESMTPA; Thu, 12 Jan 2012 12:00:27 -0500 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Thu, 12 Jan 2012 11:53:29 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120112144409.GV30469@goldbirke> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 03:44:09PM +0100, SZEDER G=C3=A1bor wrote: > > Thanks for the very detailed report! > >=20 > > I didn't test nor even compiled anything but maybe this can be fixe= d > > by adding something like: > >=20 > > opts->revs->topo_order =3D 1; > >=20 > > in parse_args() or in prepare_revs() > >=20 > > I will try to have a look tonight. >=20 > [Beware, I'm mostly clueless about git internals.] >=20 > I don't think that any commit reordering, whether it's based on > committer date, topology, or whatever, is acceptable. Commits must b= e > 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