also sprach Petr Baudis <pasky@xxxxxxx> [2008.08.12.1959 -0300]: > > I think this is definitely something TopGit can automate. > > This seems to be in principle the same as the tie branches. It might > make sense to have a way to _optionally_ make a tie branch. Yes, optional would make sense! > How should that work? Maybe there needs to be even an explicit support > for this - should TopGit just check the dependency tree when > sequencing the topic branches and have a step that says: > > "I'm going to sequence branch A. If there is branch T that has > only already sequenced branches + branch A as dependencies, > use T's content instead of A." > > Would that be satisfactory? Yes, that's what I was thinking about, if I read you correctly. > Of course, in the case of > > A1--A2--A3--A4--C > / > B1--B2--B3--B4. > > the sequenced branches would still be like > > A1--A2--A3--A4--B1--B2--B3--C > > unless you create the T1..T4 branches manually. Yes. Or add a dependency. I'd just prefer not to add a dependency where there is none; instead, I'd prefer if TopGit could be aided with the serialisation in cases when it cannot possibly make a proper decision. -- martin | http://madduck.net/ | http://two.sentenc.es/ "a mathematician is a device for turning coffee into theorems." -- paul erdös spamtraps: madduck.bogus@xxxxxxxxxxx
Attachment:
digital_signature_gpg.asc
Description: Digital signature (see http://martin-krafft.net/gpg/)
