From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stephen Bash Subject: Re: A workflow for local patch maintenance Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2013 09:22:28 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <247350414.2015225.1381497748024.JavaMail.root@genarts.com> References: <20131010173628.GB24782@sigill.intra.peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Tony Finch To: Jeff King X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Oct 11 15:31:09 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1VUco8-0007MU-6i for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Fri, 11 Oct 2013 15:31:08 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757935Ab3JKNbD (ORCPT ); Fri, 11 Oct 2013 09:31:03 -0400 Received: from hq.genarts.com ([173.9.65.1]:39720 "EHLO mail.hq.genarts.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755467Ab3JKNbB (ORCPT ); Fri, 11 Oct 2013 09:31:01 -0400 X-Greylist: delayed 507 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Fri, 11 Oct 2013 09:31:01 EDT Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.hq.genarts.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B77B2BE4541; Fri, 11 Oct 2013 09:22:33 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at mail.hq.genarts.com Received: from mail.hq.genarts.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.hq.genarts.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QQKTKy2LxTkL; Fri, 11 Oct 2013 09:22:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mail.hq.genarts.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.hq.genarts.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 18FF8BE4093; Fri, 11 Oct 2013 09:22:28 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <20131010173628.GB24782@sigill.intra.peff.net> X-Mailer: Zimbra 7.2.0_GA_2669 (ZimbraWebClient - GC30 (Mac)/7.2.0_GA_2669) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jeff King" > Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2013 1:36:28 PM > Subject: Re: A workflow for local patch maintenance > > ... snip ... > > That being said, there are some new downsides, as you noted: > > 1. Resolving conflicts between your version and the reworked > upstream version can be a pain. > > ... snip ... > > To mitigate problem 1, I will sometimes revert a local topic before > doing the upstream merge, if I know it has been reworked. Peff (slightly off topic) - A coworker of mine actually ran into this problem earlier this week. Is there recommended way to revert a merged topic branch? I assume it's essentially reverted each commit introduced by the branch, but is there a convenient invocation of revert? (easy to remember and hard to screw up) Thanks, Stephen