On 18/09/19 10:49AM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Pratyush Yadav <me@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > Assuming I have git.git cloned in ../git (relative to git-gui.git), I > > ran: > > > > git pull -Xsubtree=git-gui ../git $branches > > > > instead of: > > > > git merge $branches > > > > because git-gui's tree doesn't have those commits and branches yet, so > > we can't merge straight away. This seems to have worked, but I thought > > I'd mention it in case it would cause some subtle problems. > > I am not sure what your $branches above are referring to, but if you The $branches is from Denton's script (its in his email that I replied to) that lists all the branches merged into git/git-gui that are not in git-gui. So it should essentially be all the branches not in my tree that should be. > run "git log" in the resulting git-gui repository and see any of the > commits that are about git and not git-gui, then it is not a subtle > but a grave problem. The reason why git-gui and gitk are separate > projects is because they do not want to contaminate their history > with stuff that are not related to them (e.g. changes to "git > fast-export"). No, I was only pulling in merges related to git-gui into my tree. I do not intend to pull in any other changes. > Taking one of the commits Denton found as an example: > > >> js/misc-git-gui-stuff: 76756d67061076c046973bff2089ad49f5dc2eb6 > > (by the way, this can also be found by running > > git log --first-parent --min-parents=2 master -- git-gui Yes, that is what I was doing. Denton's script just made the tedious task of finding all those out easier. > in git itself; 02a5f25d956be187bc0 merged it in as its second > parent. The second parents of these merges you would find are > candidates---you may already have some, and you may need to merge > others to your tree; there may be some that are direct updates to > git-gui/ part of my tree (which shouldn't have been done but > mistakes happen). > > You should be able to merge this (and all other git-gui topics > already in my tree Denton pointed out) to your 'master'. If you > then make a trial merge of the result back into my tree with "git > merge -Xsubtree=git-gui", it should result in "already up to date", > i.e. a noop merge. Well, technically it won't be a noop merge because my master has some changes that haven't been pulled by you yet, but I get the point. Thanks. I'll test this out. -- Regards, Pratyush Yadav
