Junio C Hamano wrote: > Jon Loeliger <jdl@freescale.com> writes: > > >>On Tue, 2006-04-04 at 06:47, Andreas Ericsson wrote: >> >> >>>No, I mean that this would commit both to the testing branch (being the >>>result of several merged topic-branches) and to the topic-branch merged >>>in. Commit as in regular commit, with a commit-message and a patch. The >>>resulting repository would be the exact same as if the change was >>>committed only to the topic-branch and then cherry-picked on to the >>>testing-branch. > > > To be consistent, I think the result should be "as if the change > was commited only to the topic-branch and then the topic-branch > was *merged* into the testing-branch", since you start your > testing branch as "being the result of several merged topic-branches". > > I do that (manually) all the time, with: > > $ git checkout next > $ hack hack hack > > $ git checkout -m one/topic > $ git commit -o this-path that-path > $ git checkout next > $ git pull . one/topic > > Giving a short-hand for the last four-command sequence would > certainly be nice. > Ah. That's easier than what I originally looked at doing. > >>I am your number one fan! If I finish reading these 600+ >>messages, will I find out you have already implemented it, >>it's committed, and you just need me to test it now? :-) > > > Likewise... ;-) > Sorry to disappoint you so far. I'll see if I can turn up my shell-skills a notch or two and get the hang of the commit-script enough to implement it. -- Andreas Ericsson andreas.ericsson@op5.se OP5 AB www.op5.se Tel: +46 8-230225 Fax: +46 8-230231 - 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.htmlReceived on Fri Apr 21 18:51:23 2006
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 2006-04-21 18:51:44 EST