Re: Sharing a massive distributed merge

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 07:38, Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I don't think you need to do anything so drastic. You can just have
> everybody do the partial merge, commit, and then push their result. ÂAnd
> then as you suggest below, one person does the real merge, uses checkout
> to install the desired result state from each person's partial tree, and
> then everybody throws away their partial merges.
>
> The trick is that each person will resolve some conflicts and commit,
> but you need to know which ones they resolved. They can't leave things
> unmerged in the final commit. So they would have to provide such a list
> to you; one way is in the commit message[1].
>
> So let's say you have three devs, Alice, Bob, and Charlie, and one
> integrator, Matt, who will do the merge. Each of the developers does:
>
> Âgit checkout -b partial-merge
> Âgit merge old-topic
> Âgit mergetool ;# or manually resolve and git add
>
> Eventually they get tired of the conflicts and give up. So they record
> the list of resolved paths, either manually or with something like[2]:
>
...
>
> And then they stage the rest of it (knowing it will be ignored by Matt)
> and commit:
>

What if they just revert the rest? Reset the files to their states before
merge. Than Matt can just collect the partial merges with a merge on
his side and take care of the conflicts left, which should be fewer.
--
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


[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]