From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jan Veldeman Subject: Re: [RFC] Stgit - patch history / add extra parents Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2005 09:09:55 +0200 Message-ID: <20050825070955.GA762@eros.intern.mind.be> References: <20050818195753.GA9066@fanta> <20050819194832.GA8562@fanta> <1124572356.7512.21.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20050821094059.GA5453@fanta> <20050823212305.GA5936@fanta> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Catalin Marinas , git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Aug 25 09:11:31 2005 Return-path: Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1E8BsZ-0002Ua-Vs for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Thu, 25 Aug 2005 09:10:28 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751552AbVHYHKO (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Aug 2005 03:10:14 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751554AbVHYHKO (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Aug 2005 03:10:14 -0400 Received: from NAT.office.mind.be ([62.166.230.82]:45209 "EHLO NAT.office.mind.be") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751553AbVHYHKN (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Aug 2005 03:10:13 -0400 Received: (qmail 911 invoked by uid 10029); 25 Aug 2005 07:09:55 -0000 To: Daniel Barkalow Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.28i Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Daniel Barkalow wrote: [...] > > The parents which should be visible to the outside, will always be versions > > of my development tree, which I have previously pushed out. My way of > > working would become: > > * make changes, all over the place, using stgit > > * still make changes (none of these gets tracked, intermittent versions are > > lost) > > * having a good day: changes looks good, I want to push this out: > > * push my tree out > > * stgit-free (which makes the pushed out commits, the new parents of my > > stgit patches) > > * restart from top > > I'm not sure how applicable to this situation stgit really is; I see stgit > as optimized for the case of a patch set which is basically done, where > you want to keep it applicable to the mainline as the mainline advances. Maybe I forgot to mention this: I would also like to have my development tree split up in a patch stack. The separate patches makes tracking the mainline a lot easier (conflicts are a lot easier to solve) > > For your application, I'd just have a git branch full of various stuff, > and then generate clean commits by branching mainline, diffing development > against it, cutting the diff down to just what I want to push, and > applying that. Then the clean patch goes into stgit. But this would assume that once the patch goes into stgit, it won't change except when the parent gets updated. I think we will still change the patches quite a bit and simultanious by a couple of people. > > > [...] > > my proposal does something like this, but a little more: not only does it > > keep track of the link between old-top and new-top, it also keeps track of > > the links between old-patch-in-between and new-patch-in-between. > > (This makes sense when the top is being removed or reordered) > > I was thinking of this as being the top and bottom commits for a single > tracked patch, not as a whole series. I think patches lower wouldn't be > affected, and patches higher would see this as a rebase. > ah, ok, I misunderstood that part Best regards, Jan PS. sorry if my responses are sometimes a bit late, I'm trying to find more time to spend on this list ;-)