Christos Trochalakis writes: > Hello, I have created a light fork of an upstream project and I am not > quite sure which "syncing with upstream" workflow fits better. > > I can think of 3 solutions > 1. the obvious one, merge the upstream changes on the forked branch > and make the necessary modifications on the merge commit > 2. Rebase upstream commits on top of the fork & make a commit with the > necessary modifications > 3. Cherrypick & modify upstream commits > > Which practice is considered better? I would recommend #1 if you expect other people to base work on your tree, and #2 if you don't. #1 preserves both tree's histories, rather than occasionally rewriting your tree's history like #2 does. #3 at best hides the relationship between the upstream history and the cherry-picked commits, which is why it isn't a serious contender to me. Michael Poole -- To unsubscribe from this list: 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