From: Avery Pennarun <apenwarr@gmail.com>
To: tom fogal <tfogal@alumni.unh.edu>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: sharing git work while downstream from svn?
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2009 23:17:24 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <32541b130908111617m12fa4b97vddfa9793dff31f29@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <auto-000020209671@sci.utah.edu>
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 11:14 PM, tom fogal<tfogal@alumni.unh.edu> wrote:
> Avery Pennarun <apenwarr@gmail.com> writes:
>> On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 10:55 PM, tom fogal<tfogal@alumni.unh.edu> wrote:
>> > This gets to be a mess when trunk changes: I'll rebase + potentially
>> > fix some conflicts. Other developers with some of the experimental
>> > patches will svn update, and get similar conflicts. These might differ
>> > in subtle ways, and now exchanging patches gets more difficult.
>>
>> Instead, do all your work in a branch *other* than the git-svn main
>> branch. When you're ready to merge your stuff into svn, do:
> [snip]
>> This basically results in a *single* commit getting sent to svn,
>> rather than the batch of all the git commits you've been working
>> on. Most svn users don't care about this, because they lose all that
>> granularity whenever they merge a branch anyhow.
>
> ... but I, as a git user forced to live in an svn world, *do* value all
> of that history. When I find a bug a month later, I want git-bisect
> to be useful. Further, when I'm reviewing sets of changes in a search
> for some particular change, I want to be able to skip over large sets
> of patches simply by looking at the first line of a commit log. If I
> squash all that history down, I have to wade into the patch itself.
That's the great thing! Your git history never gets lost with this
technique, since you *never* rewind any branches. The detailed
history just never makes it into svn, which has no way of representing
it anyhow.
As a bonus, the fact that your git history becomes more and more
detailed vs. the svn history slowly makes your case for switching
everybody else to git that much stronger :)
Have fun,
Avery
P.S. Shameless plug: I wrote the chapter about git-svn in O'Reilly's
"Version Control With Git," in which I described this technique in
more detail. (I *don't* make any money on commissions on that book,
as I'm not the primary author.)
prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-08-11 23:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-08-11 22:55 sharing git work while downstream from svn? tom fogal
2009-08-11 23:03 ` Avery Pennarun
2009-08-11 23:14 ` tom fogal
2009-08-11 23:17 ` Avery Pennarun [this message]
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=32541b130908111617m12fa4b97vddfa9793dff31f29@mail.gmail.com \
--to=apenwarr@gmail.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tfogal@alumni.unh.edu \
/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).