From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Avery Pennarun Subject: Re: Cherry woes Date: Tue, 12 May 2009 13:57:32 -0400 Message-ID: <32541b130905121057s19f9dd42h566a017d47bfe865@mail.gmail.com> References: <4A097659.4060507@drmicha.warpmail.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Git Mailing List To: Michael J Gruber X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue May 12 19:58:01 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 1M3wEq-0004U6-V0 for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Tue, 12 May 2009 19:58:01 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753723AbZELR5w (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 May 2009 13:57:52 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753533AbZELR5w (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 May 2009 13:57:52 -0400 Received: from yw-out-2324.google.com ([74.125.46.29]:18584 "EHLO yw-out-2324.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753041AbZELR5v (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 May 2009 13:57:51 -0400 Received: by yw-out-2324.google.com with SMTP id 5so68625ywb.1 for ; Tue, 12 May 2009 10:57:52 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=OamX1+wWNmrq8iZxsUxGgKU+Qu+p1O0g5Nmc8MDHx1U=; b=ISiX3hAqrha46epJSqNss/erQ6QTbf6De1f0/8YsV8nF1/ckD8MCgw3VfyFpwo85Nd 1y3g65F3hP/Z7AOqL9nv9cGot7E0vv+nSkA7qWIEu4aMdJSXYDQQ9CEzewxzLbjF9tiL zPCuatAA91w+eEeM6rDwfmD+LARgVCObzOTKQ= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=W24WIiPPesz/avlrrC7pAPZQHe5hOQKSKPJ+Hy+ibKrefS7oEbcHClkNSvS+QC81or eg15Em5rDcfOMkgHxdn1dzuqG4gKXC6BFmnpwe8sj/qoQdHmzCS+bCabqjNvWHlMF2mR D3bOHFdbXZ1I5tbUhGLUMCvtdgo4c2K19nZ4Y= Received: by 10.151.134.8 with SMTP id l8mr218327ybn.163.1242151072284; Tue, 12 May 2009 10:57:52 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4A097659.4060507@drmicha.warpmail.net> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 9:15 AM, Michael J Gruber wrote: > Now, adjusting the doc is easy, but I still feel that cherry does not > give the most useful info in the situation at hand. But how would I find > a better lower boundary for the range ..upstream? merge-base of master > and upstream is upstream so that doesn't cut it. So I'm wondering what > the right approach is and whether anyone cares. I think the problem is that there's no well-defined "furthest back" place where a particular patch might already exist in upstream. Perhaps it was placed in upstream three years ago. My guess is git-cherry was designed for a primarily rebase-like workflow. In that case, you would *never* merge between the two branches in question, so the fork-point (ie. merge-base) would be the right thing to use, as git-cherry already seems to do. Aha, and the git changelog seems to support this theory, as we can see by the first mention of git-cherry in 93c36dcd0a4f6373e3a02a8505046801106ddb85: [PATCH] git-cherry: find commits not merged upstream. The git-cherry command helps the git-rebase script by finding commits that have not been merged upstream. Commits already included in upstream are prefixed with '-' (meaning "drop from my local pull"), while commits missing from upstream are prefixed with '+' (meaning "add to the updated upstream"). So my conclusion: git cherry is not really compatible with git merge. Its man page could probably use a clarification to this effect. Have fun, Avery