On Thu, Jun 29, 2006 at 03:34:21PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > For example, I maintain two public branches "master" and > "next", the former is supposed to be quite stable and the latter > to contain sane proposed updates that need to be proven before > graduating to "master". > > Sometimes I get patches that I have to apply on top of "next" > because of textual dependency, but the changes are worthwhile to > have it in "master" earlier than the changes the other series > depends on. > > o---o---o---o---o master > \ > o---o---o---o---o next > \ > o---o---o good > > $ git checkout good > $ git rebase --onto master next > > o---o---o---o---o master > | \ > | o---o---o good > \ > o---o---o---o---o next > OK, so you're saying "take everything in good but not in next, and try to apply it to master." I don't know why I find that syntax so counterintuitive. Something like git checkout -b newgood master git cherry-pick next..good would seem more obvious. But I think this has been discussed before. OK, thanks for the explanation. --b. - : 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