Re: [RFC] git commit --branch
- From
Martin Waitz <tali@admingilde.org>
- Date
- May 29, 2006, 21:22 UTC
- Message-ID
- <20060529212249.GF14325@admingilde.org>
- In-Reply-To
- <20060529204158.GC28538@spearce.org>
hoi :)
On Mon, May 29, 2006 at 04:41:58PM -0400, Shawn Pearce wrote:
Show 8 quoted lines
> Interesting. I have been kicking around doing the very same > thing myself but just have not gotten around to it. Its complex, > especially if the current HEAD isn't strictly the merge commit > between the topic branch and the previous value of HEAD; in that > case you may want to replay the commits which are on HEAD but are > post the merge commit using a form of git-rebase. Except you would > want to preserve any merges which happened by remerging them rather > than simply exporting a massive patch and reapplying it.
Perhaps something like merge-recursive makes sense, except that I have no clue how it works ;-)
But then an operation as important as commit has to be bullet-proof and I don't like to do anything complex in there.
In any case, this functionality needs a lot of testing. Any contributions to the test case are welcome :)
Show 6 quoted lines
> > + git update-ref "$onto_branch" $commit2 && > > If this is going into next perhaps you would like to considering adding > the -m flag to your git-update-ref calls and include a log message > in the reflog (if the user has it enabled for the current branch and > the topic branch)?
Makes sense.
> Also shouldn't this be 'git-update-ref'?
Yes, all the rest uses git-*, too. If the move to buildin commands continues at the same speed we may soon be able to remove some "-"s, but it's not time for that yet.
-- Martin Waitz