From: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@gmail.com>
To: Pavel Roskin <proski@gnu.org>
Cc: git <git@vger.kernel.org>, Charles Lever <cel@citi.umich.edu>
Subject: Re: StGIT: "stg new" vs "stg new --force"
Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 18:31:04 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <b0943d9e0601211031h2ef0a499s@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1137517300.20556.26.camel@dv>
On 17/01/06, Pavel Roskin <proski@gnu.org> wrote:
> I was going to suggest that would be logical to run "stg refresh"
> implicitly if "stg new" is used on modified files. But then I realized
> that it would be even better if future versions of StGIT allowed to
> refresh (i.e. add changes to) patches other that the current one.
I think that would be useful but not easy to implement. StGIT was
designed so that all operations happen on the top patch. The current
tree changes depend on the top patch and refreshing a different patch
with those changes would involve a three-way merge operation. This
merging can generate conflicts which are not relevant to the top tree
and they might even destroy the changes (depending on the merge
options).
The way I work is, again, through a dummy patch which can be folded
into the patch I want. This way I am sure that I still have the
changes in the dummy patch if I'm not happy with the merge. Maybe all
these could be done transparently and automatically remove the dummy
patch if conflicts exist.
--
prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-01-21 18:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-01-13 9:24 StGIT: "stg new" vs "stg new --force" Pavel Roskin
2006-01-13 9:34 ` Karl Hasselström
2006-01-16 8:18 ` Catalin Marinas
2006-01-17 17:01 ` Pavel Roskin
2006-01-17 21:57 ` Yann Dirson
2006-01-17 23:16 ` Pavel Roskin
2006-01-18 19:37 ` Yann Dirson
2006-01-19 0:49 ` Pavel Roskin
2006-01-19 21:38 ` Yann Dirson
2006-01-20 6:23 ` Pavel Roskin
2006-01-20 18:22 ` J. Bruce Fields
2006-01-24 5:30 ` Pavel Roskin
2006-01-24 17:54 ` J. Bruce Fields
2006-01-24 18:17 ` Pavel Roskin
2006-01-24 21:23 ` Catalin Marinas
2006-01-21 18:24 ` Catalin Marinas
2006-01-22 5:05 ` Pavel Roskin
2006-01-21 18:20 ` Catalin Marinas
2006-01-21 18:31 ` Catalin Marinas [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=b0943d9e0601211031h2ef0a499s@mail.gmail.com \
--to=catalin.marinas@gmail.com \
--cc=cel@citi.umich.edu \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=proski@gnu.org \
/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).