Re: using stgit/guilt for public branches

From: Robin Rosenberg <robin.rosenberg.lists@dewire.com>
Date: Apr 25, 2007, 21:37 UTC
Message-ID: <200704252337.05851.robin.rosenberg.lists@dewire.com>
In-Reply-To: <20070425191838.GA6267@filer.fsl.cs.sunysb.edu>

onsdag 25 april 2007 skrev Josef Sipek:

> On Wed, Apr 25, 2007 at 03:20:49PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:

[...]

Show 12 quoted lines

> > I am concerned that publishing a git branch managed by stg/guilt
> > would present problems: it seems that every time patches are re-ordered,
> > a patch is re-written or removed, or we update from upstream,
> > everyone who pulls the tree branch will have a hard-to-resolve conflict.
> > 
> > Is that really a problem? If so, would it be possible to work around this
> > somehow?
> 
> I thought about this problem a while back when I was trying to decide how to
> manage the Unionfs git repository. I came to the conclusion, that there was
> no clean way of doing this (at least not using guilt - I can't really speak
> for stgit, as I don't know how it does things exactly).

StGit has the same problem. Publishing such a branch is only for viewing if you want to publish the tip, like the pu branch in the Git repo. You shouldn't merge from pu either.

Patches your are done and not stored as patches anymore can be propagated to a "stable" branch using git branch -f stable HEAD~$(stg applied|wc -l) which is then pushed like any other branch. Don't play the stg uncommit game too much to avoid a mess.

I'm  not sure the branch command is the best way, but you get the idea.

-- robin