Re: [PATCH v8 06/16] sequencer: introduce the `merge` command

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

 



Hi Philip,

On Sun, 22 Apr 2018, Philip Oakley wrote:

> From: "Johannes Schindelin" <johannes.schindelin@xxxxxx>
> > This patch is part of the effort to reimplement `--preserve-merges` with
> > a substantially improved design, a design that has been developed in the
> > Git for Windows project to maintain the dozens of Windows-specific patch
> > series on top of upstream Git.
> >
> > The previous patch implemented the `label` and `reset` commands to label
> 
> The previous patch was [Patch 05/16] git-rebase--interactive: clarify
> arguments, so this statement doesn't appear to be true. Has a patch been
> missed or re-ordered? Or should it be simply "This patch implements" ?
> Likewise the patch subject would be updated.

As Phillip guessed correctly, it was a mistaken `git commit --amend`.

> > commits and to reset to labeled commits. This patch adds the `merge`
> 
> s/adds/also adds/ ?

No, as I really want to keep those two commits separate. I disentangled
them.

> > command, with the following syntax:
> >
> > merge [-C <commit>] <rev> # <oneline>
> >
> > The <commit> parameter in this instance is the *original* merge commit,
> > whose author and message will be used for the merge commit that is about
> > to be created.
> >
> > The <rev> parameter refers to the (possibly rewritten) revision to
> > merge. Let's see an example of a todo list:
> >
> The example ought to also note that `label onto` is to
> `# label current HEAD with a name`, seeing as this is the first occurance.
> It may be obvious in retrospect, but not at first reading.

I added some sentence to describe what `label onto` does and why.

> > label onto
> >
> > # Branch abc
> > reset onto
> 
> Is this reset strictly necessary. We are already there @head.

No, this is not strictly necessary, but

- it makes it easier to auto-generate (otherwise you would have to keep
  track of the "current HEAD" while generating that todo list, and

- if I keep the `reset onto` there, then it is *a lot* easier to reorder
  topic branches.

Ciao,
Dscho



[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]

  Powered by Linux