On Mon, Oct 31, 2005 at 02:14:58PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
No, you're reading me wrong, but I wasn't clear enough either.
At the end of my message, I'm noting that I'm considering smaller
changes here, not huge features.
Basically, I'm not talking about merging with Linus. I'm
talking about merging with myself. Let's assume we're all going with
the clean-up-your-history model. It is quite clear that you and Linus
agree on that model, and I wasn't so much arguing against it as querying
everyone's opinion on it.
So, I have a git repository that is my For-Linus repository.
It's got a clean history. What's my workflow?
1) Clone the repo to a Work tree.
2) Create and test fix X, with perhaps some >1 number of commits.
3) Bring that fix back to the For-Linus repository.
This is a small change. It's not something that needs stepS, as
you put them. But my history in the Work tree is "dirty," so I cannot
just pull from Work to For-Linus.
As the tools currently stand, I need to hand-diff and patch my
commits. Neither git nor cogito have a command to do this first-class
"the way you should do it" common operation. It is, in my experience, a
pain. Not as large a pain as some things, but certainly second class to
much of the workflow git/cogito provide. If it is supposed to be a
regular part of my workflow, what's wrong with making it a first-class
operation?
Obviously, large features should and do have logical steps. I'm
never going to be against that.
Joel