Re: Patch (apply) vs. Pull

From: Daniel Barkalow <barkalow@iabervon.org>
Date: 2005-06-22 04:02:05
On Mon, 20 Jun 2005, Darrin Thompson wrote:

> On Mon, 2005-06-20 at 10:22 -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> >  (6) Throw away my HEAD, making Linus HEAD my HEAD, while
> >      preserving changes I have made since I forked from him.  I
> >      use "jit-rewind" for this.
> 
> When you say it that way it sounds so _bad_. :-)

The reason is actually that he has to end up with a different history,
which is the history of the project mainline, rather than the history of
his tree. He could, of course, follow his own history, but then
communication with people who use a different history becomes difficult.

> Would it make sense to come up with a way to make an emailed series of
> patches represent a series of commits? Could patches still be
> cherrypicked?

Commits are fundamentally resistant to cherrypicking, because they give
the state of the tree rather than expressing changes in that
state. Long-term, I think that something like StGIT should be integrated
into the system and deal with generating the HEAD you get after getting
patches in.

	-Daniel
*This .sig left intentionally blank*

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Received on Wed Jun 22 04:04:22 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 2005-06-22 04:04:23 EST