From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Wolfgang Denk Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2008 11:00:48 +0200 Subject: [U-Boot-Users] usage of git to send patches to u-boot mailinglist In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 10 Jul 2008 08:21:49 +0800." <20080710002148.GD4657@prithivi.gnumonks.org> Message-ID: <20080710090048.CF75F248FE@gemini.denx.de> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de In message <20080710002148.GD4657@prithivi.gnumonks.org> you wrote: > > can do, even though I believe it is by far not the best tool to do so. The definition of "the best tool" depends on many things, including previous experience and personal preferences. > The problem is that I would have to use one local branch per feature > (i.e. lots of local branches that need to be kept in sync), and even > then any incremental changes/fixes to one particular feature are visible > in the commitlog (and thus result in changelog pollution). Having many local branches is no problem with git. Git provides excellent help to rebase such branches, and using "--interactive" gives you a lot of options to edit the history. > So is this really the preferred workflow? How are others dealing with > this? How to avoid commitlog pollution? I started using "git-rebase -i", and so far it seems to work fine for me. But I'm definitely not an expert. Best regards, Wolfgang Denk -- DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: wd at denx.de Contrary to popular belief, thinking does not cause brain damage.