Christoph Höger wrote:
> But since both repos have no common origin, I will always see that
> merge message, right?
Yes, I believe so.
> So my only chance would be to
>
> a) make them have the same origin (could I rebase my work repo to
> the svn repo and have the history still in place?)
Definitely. When you run git svn rebase, it will pull the latest
changes from the svn server, apply them to your repo, then re-apply
your changes on top of that.
> b) apply every single change as a patch via git-am
You could do this, but it would get tedious.
Another option might be to only have one git repo that you use with
git svn. Say you do most work at work (I know, that seems unlikely,
but just pretend, for the sake of the example ;). You could use git
svn at work to clone the svn repo. Then from home, you would clone
the git repo at work. That way, your work from home would be pushed
back to the git repo at work and you would only push to the svn repo
from work.
You would still want to ensure that the history you pushed to the svn
repo was flat, i.e. it didn't contain merge commits. But that's
simple enough with git rebase, git merge --squash, etc.
There will always be some pain involved in using git with svn, because
in the end you still are limited by what svn allows.
--
Todd OpenPGP -> KeyID: 0xBEAF0CE3 | URL: www.pobox.com/~tmz/pgp
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
User, n.: The word computer professionals use when they mean "idiot."
-- Dave Barry
Attachment:
pgpRYP4VRlagf.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
