Re: [RFC] git-publish

From: Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org>
Date: Aug 13, 2006, 19:13 UTC
Message-ID: <20060813191346.GA21487@mars.ravnborg.org>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0608131158500.9789@iabervon.org>

On Sun, Aug 13, 2006 at 12:34:49PM -0400, Daniel Barkalow wrote:

Show 6 quoted lines

> 
> Actually, I'm also curious as to how other people generate the series of 
> commits for a patch series, when they've actually got a working directory 
> that contains the end result. I doubt that people actually do their 
> modifications in patch order, committing each time, without writing 
> and testing the end result.

hack hack git commit -a test <= ohh crap a trivial bug git format-patch HEAD^..HEAD git reset HEAD^ --hard patch -p1 0001* hack hack git commit -a <= reading in old changelog from 0001*

The above is easier if you know git I expect. If I find bugs in older patches I just go back more steps.

I often (twice or more for each kernel release) throw away my kbuild.git tree and start all over. That gives me a recent kernel to work with and still providing Linux with a linar history.

I have considered stgit - but have not tried it. The above works pretty well for me (my fingers and my logic i accused to it now) so the incentive to shift is small.

But important note is that publishing is something I defer until some limited test has been done. And when I omit that I have always ended u pushing some crappy stuff that needs to be dealt with.

Sam