On 11/27/07, Sean <seanlkml@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, November 27, 2007 11:37 pm, Jon Smirl said: > > > Patch management is an important part of the work flow. I would hope > > that git implements patch management as a core feature in future > > versions. stgit/guilt/quilt are valuable since they blazed the trail > > and figured out what commands are useful. As time passes these > > features can become more highly integrated into core git. > > Think this is a separate topic from where we started though. > > > Of course you've never screwed up a repository using git commands, > > right? I've messed up plenty. A good way to mess up a repo is to get > > the data in .git/* out of sync with what is in the repo. I'm getting > > good enough with git that I can fix most mess up with a few edits, but > > it took me two years to get to that point. Rolling back to a check > > point is way easier. User error and a command failing are both equally > > valid ways to mess up a repo. > > What are you looking for that reflogs don't already handle? A UI that doesn't need a year of using git before you know what to do with it. Delta tracking of changes made in .git/* that aren't currently being tracked. reflogs is a piece of the complete solution. A higher level of integration for stgit would probably make it more bullet proof. > > Cheers, > Sean > > -- 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
