From: Yann Dirson Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2007 20:03:39 GMT Subject: Re: Rebasing stgit stacks Message-ID: <20070124200339.GA4036@nan92-1-81-57-214-146.fbx.proxad.net> In-Reply-To: On Wed, Jan 24, 2007 at 12:37:15PM +0000, Catalin Marinas wrote: > >Right - "branch --clone" could also use that (or maybe it does already > >by design). Together with this, "pick --fold" and possibly "sync" > >(although I never used the latter so I'm not 100% sure how it works) > >could register a merge, and sometime in the future we could use this > >information to be able to do some merging. I'm not going to look > >into this soon, but I have this popping out regularly in my head ;) > > 'sync' is still experimental. I usually have the same patches on > different branches (i.e. a stable kernel branch for customers and a > more up-to-date branch for pushing patches upstream). That sounds like a typical usecase we should document :) > I wanted a way to automatically synchronise the changes made to some > patches found in both branches. This command folds the remote patch > onto the current one using a three-way merge. If they are identical, > the current patch shouldn't change. If they are not identical, it > leads to conflicts that have to be manually solved. So, indeed "sync" is a kind of merge tool already. It could be a good start to implement merging of forked patches. But going further would probably require to further develop the technics to work with patches of patches. best regards, -- Yann.