On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 12:34 AM, Johannes Sixt <j.sixt@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > After you created the fixup, you have this situation: > > o--o--o <- A (feature branch) > / > --o--x <- X (the fix-up branch) > \ > o--o--o <- Z (probably your master) > > You merge the fix-up into the feature branch and continue developing the > feature: > > o--o--o--M--o--o <- A > / / > --o--x-----' <- X > \ > o--o--o <- Z > > Other people need the fix in Z right now, so you merge it into Z as well: > > o--o--o--M--o--o <- A > / / > --o--x-----< <- X > \ \ > o--o--o--N <- Z > > You complete your feature and merge it into Z: > > o--o--o--M--o--o <- A > / / \ > --o--x-----< \ <- X > \ \ \ > o--o--o--N---------O <- Z > > The fix-up commit is only once in your history. Thanks for the info. That's what I was hoping, but I was thinking that I'd get duplicate commits if I did that. I'll have to try it out when I run into this situation again. Related to this, is there a way to easily find the common merge base given a bunch of a branches? When I want to fix a bug, I want to say "Given branches A, B, C, D, and E, where should I fork my bug fix branch from so that I can merge this branch into all those branches without getting duplicate commits?". -- 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
