Re: What's the best method between merging and rebasing ?
- From
- Xavier Maillard <zedek@gnu.org>
- Date
- Mar 12, 2007, 19:14 UTC
- Message-ID
- <200703121914.l2CJEqW0031669@localhost.localdomain>
- In-Reply-To
- <20070312173727.GC30489@mad.intersec.eu>
Hi,
From: Pierre Habouzit <madcoder@debian.org>
On Mon, Mar 12, 2007 at 05:34:55PM +0100, Xavier Maillard wrote:
> So it seems to be cherry-picks + rebase master on new HEAD but I > am not sure at how things are doing :)
okay then I got this right, you don't want to rebase master on new HEAD because you would keep the commits you don't want (I guess). What
you start from:
orig master -> A -> B -> C (master) \ -> D -> E -> F topic
let's say you want to keep A and C from master. here is what I'd do:
$ git checkout topic # topic will be the new master
$ git cherry-pick A C # we want to keep A and CGot it for this one :)
we now have:
orig master -> A -> B -> C (master) \ -> D -> E -> F -> A' -> C' (topic)
$ git branch -D master
For historical reasons, I have to keep my master around so I won't delete it completely. Maybe there is a way to tell that a branch is considered "dead" thus indicating there won't be any new developement onto it. I will check this.
As I have been told privately, what I want in reality is a reset of master onto my new HEAD.
I think I have misunderstood reset behaviour.
So this is how I end up now (from my new master branch):
$ git cherry-pick <commits> $ git rebase master~NUM $ git reset master HEAD
There I would need something to tell old master is dead but it is optionnal (a single tag will do that).
Does that make sense for you ?
Regards,
P.S: I have problems reading your posts, my mail buffer is full of =20 here and there
-- Xavier