Re: [ANNOUNCE] pg - A patch porcelain for GIT
- From
Karl Hasselström <kha@treskal.com>
- Date
- Feb 16, 2006, 07:54 UTC
- Message-ID
- <20060216075440.GA11939@diana.vm.bytemark.co.uk>
- In-Reply-To
- <b0943d9e0602150925v6f01accfw@mail.gmail.com>
On 2006-02-15 17:25:30 +0000, Catalin Marinas wrote:
Show 17 quoted lines
> On 14/02/06, Petr Baudis <pasky@suse.cz> wrote: > > > It is ok as long as you know what are you doing - if you don't > > push out the commits you've just "undid" (or work on a public > > accessible repository in the first place, but I think that's kind > > of rare these days; quick survey - does anyone reading these lines > > do that?), there's nothing wrong on it, and it gives you nice > > flexibility. > > > > For example, to import bunch of patches (I guess that's the > > original intention behind this) you just run git-am on them and > > then stg uncommit all of the newly added commits. > > This is a sensible way of using an uncommit command but I initially > thought it would be better to make things harder for people wanting > to re-write the history. Anyway, I'll keep this command on my todo > list.
stgit rewrites history all the time anyway. And as far as I recall, there's nothing in the documentation that warns the user not to publish stgit-managed branches. :-)
--
Karl Hasselström, kha@treskal.com
www.treskal.com/kalle