From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Johannes Schindelin Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] Internationalization of git-gui Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2007 00:01:01 +0100 (BST) Message-ID: References: <622391.43998.qm@web38909.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <200707210951.00210.stimming@tuhh.de> <20070721080338.GT32566@spearce.org> <200707211433.29318.stimming@tuhh.de> <7vejj1v92b.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <7vzm1ptmdm.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: Christian Stimming , "Shawn O. Pearce" , Brett Schwarz , git@vger.kernel.org, Paul Mackerras To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sun Jul 22 01:01:21 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1ICNwq-0003Hy-Op for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Sun, 22 Jul 2007 01:01:17 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751274AbXGUXBN (ORCPT ); Sat, 21 Jul 2007 19:01:13 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751304AbXGUXBN (ORCPT ); Sat, 21 Jul 2007 19:01:13 -0400 Received: from mail.gmx.net ([213.165.64.20]:55195 "HELO mail.gmx.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1751050AbXGUXBN (ORCPT ); Sat, 21 Jul 2007 19:01:13 -0400 Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 21 Jul 2007 23:01:11 -0000 Received: from wbgn013.biozentrum.uni-wuerzburg.de (EHLO openvpn-client) [132.187.25.13] by mail.gmx.net (mp004) with SMTP; 22 Jul 2007 01:01:11 +0200 X-Authenticated: #1490710 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1+3YCBLwoK35AGpjqDiiAHUnB4YAC8V8fo9zCuI4q 8+hmpBcJx3Fz/R X-X-Sender: gene099@racer.site In-Reply-To: <7vzm1ptmdm.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Hi, On Sat, 21 Jul 2007, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Johannes Schindelin writes: > > >> Two questions and a half. > >> > >> - The above means git-gui-i18n.git's master is rebased. Is > >> that the intention? IOW, people are supposed to work on it > >> with fetch+rebase, not fetch+merge (= pull)? > > > > Okay, you have me there. Usually I am the one saying "rebasing is bad". > > So I'll refrain from that practice. From now on, 'master' will _not_ be > > rebased. From time to time I will prepare 'for-shawn' branches, which are > > "master rebased onto git-gui". > > I did not mean to say "rebase is bad". Quite the contrary. Yeah, I was not really precise. Rebase is only bad for branches that want to be tracked. As you can see from my work on rebase -i, I recently converted to an avid user of rebase, from somebody who detested the feature a year ago. > [...] I think it would be a reasonable and manageable workflow to: > > - people fork from 'mob', push back to 'mob'; > > - you > - build 'master' by cherry picking good bits from 'mob', and > - do your own fixups and framework changes on 'master', > - merge 'master' back to 'mob' to allow contributors to > adjust their work on the updated 'master' by simply > following 'mob', > > - and eventually clean-up 'master' to make it mergeable and/or > applicable to git-gui itself. I plan to pull and push from mob, from time to time cherry-picking/rebasing and cleaning up to a branch called 'for-shawn'. To keep things a little synchronised, I plan to make grafts at stages where master^{tree} = for-shawn^{tree}, so that rebase is easier. Ciao, Dscho