On 9/15/07, Karl Hasselström <kha@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 2007-09-14 12:18:17 -0400, Jon Smirl wrote: > > Another way to handle this would be to eliminate the ability of > > pop/push to reorder and extend sink/float to handle unapplied > > patches. > > I think that I'd like the latter without the former -- that is, > teaching sink/float how to handle unapplied patches, and leaving > push/pop as is. That'll let you do what you tried to do in the first > place, and will leave us with a more redundant command set, but I > don't think that's bad. The stack model may be too simplistic. My current patches involve four groups, there is ordering in the group but the groups can be applied independently. Patches could be marked as depending on another patch/group. You could then mark patches applied/unapplied and stg would sort out the order. Allowing group names would make this easier. The mm kernel has 1,500 patches. It must be a pain trying to keep these in a linear order. The git diff output format could be extended with Depends-on/Group-name lines. That would let Andrew import the dependencies. > Another idea that's been kicked around is to have a general reorder > command, that spawns an editor and lets you move around (and delete) > patch names until you're satisfied. (This too would be implemented in > terms of push and pop of single patches.) > > -- > Karl Hasselström, kha@xxxxxxxxxxx > www.treskal.com/kalle > -- Jon Smirl jonsmirl@xxxxxxxxx - 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
