Sam Vilain wrote:
Junio C Hamano wrote:
For example, the point jdl raised during the discussion is far
easier to understand. When working on multiple topics, he often
needs to test them as a whole, so he pulls them into a test
branch (can be a throwaway branch). When he needs to do fixups,
it is most efficient to do compile/run test while still in the
test branch, but after things test out, in order to keep
logically different things separate, he needs to go back to
relevant topic branches and make a commit. This is painful --
are there ways to make this easier [*2*]?
Would patch commutation calculus help with his problem?
I'd provisionally say "yes, that's the fit". It's just like having
multiple topic branches all checked out at once, with commits going to
the appropriate branch as necessary.
Wouldn't "git commit -M -b topic", for committing to a different branch
than what is checked out (-b) and also to the checked out branch (-M)
have the same beneficial effects, but without the complexity of hydras
and patch dependency theory? It would only remove the cherry-pick stage
though, but perhaps it's good enough. Although when I think about it, -b
<branch> for committing to another branch and -B <branch> for doing the
above probably makes more sense.
Those flags don't exist currently btw, in case someone's reading this on
the archives.
--
Andreas Ericsson andreas.ericsson@xxxxxx
OP5 AB www.op5.se
Tel: +46 8-230225 Fax: +46 8-230231
-
: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html