Re: Status of git.git repository

From: Petr Baudis <pasky@suse.cz>
Date: Aug 4, 2005, 22:26 UTC
Message-ID: <20050804222611.GE24479@pasky.ji.cz>
In-Reply-To: <7vhded6o0r.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>

Dear diary, on Sat, Jul 30, 2005 at 04:11:48AM CEST, I got a letter where Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net> told me that...

Show 5 quoted lines

> By the way, do people mind my posting my own patches to the
> list?  I keep the same in the "pu" (proposed updates) branch, so
> if the list readers think I am just adding noise to the list
> traffic, I would stop doing so, and instead just invite
> interested people to browse the "pu" branch.

Browsing the "pu" branch may be bothersome and you won't ensure that the related discussion stays in a single thread, and posting the patches here makes them generally more visible, so I think it's a good idea to keep doing so.

Cogito (and Git itself as well, I guess) does not handle those "volatile" branches well at all - following them is difficult since Cogito will think that you did some local commits and want to do a tree merge. Would anyone consider doing

	if ref(updatebranch) == ref(master) then
		merge: always_fastforward
	else
		merge: perhaps_treemerge

a Bad Thing (tm)? It seems to me that it should do the right thing and never get it wrong.

-- 
				Petr "Pasky" Baudis
Stuff: http://pasky.or.cz/
If you want the holes in your knowledge showing up try teaching
someone.  -- Alan Cox