Re: [RFC] git commit --branch

From: Martin Waitz <tali@admingilde.org>
Date: May 29, 2006, 21:55 UTC
Message-ID: <20060529215537.GH14325@admingilde.org>
In-Reply-To: <20060529213543.GA29054@spearce.org>

hoi :)

On Mon, May 29, 2006 at 05:35:43PM -0400, Shawn Pearce wrote:

Show 5 quoted lines

> Now that diff+apply is probably faster than a 3 way merge in
> read-tree precisely because it doesn't need to run merge-recursive
> I'm starting to look at how we can use apply to do partial
> application of a patch and use RCS' diff3 or just drop a reject
> file out when a hunk doesn't apply cleanly.

but when applying patches, we have to be careful not to overwrite any changes in the working tree which have not yet been committed. With read-tree it should operate entirely in its temporary index without touching the working tree.

Show 8 quoted lines

> > But then an operation as important as commit has to be bullet-proof
> > and I don't like to do anything complex in there.
> 
> I agree.  But I'd like to see some sort of functionality to
> automatically handle some common topic branche cases in commit.
> Of course I consider the current commit tool to already be too
> complex (like being able to pull the commit message from any
> random commit).

And I really feel guilt for trying to add even more. Is there some other way to add such a feature?

I have been dreaming of such a system for years now, and with GIT it really feels feasible at last. Graphics programs could compose an image out of different layers for ages, now it is time for version control software to do the same :-)

-- 
Martin Waitz