Re: StGIT (or guilt) + git-svn?

From: Steven Walter <stevenrwalter@gmail.com>
Date: Jul 24, 2007, 23:48 UTC
Message-ID: <20070724234817.GA29700@dervierte>
In-Reply-To: <46A5EE4B.7020905@midwinter.com>

On Tue, Jul 24, 2007 at 08:19:23PM +0800, Steven Grimm wrote:

Show 12 quoted lines

> He wants to create some files in his git-svn clone and use git to manage 
> them -- checkpointing his work in progress, backing out changes, etc., 
> without publishing those files to the svn repository. The files in 
> question are not already in svn. But he does want to work on other files 
> that *are* in the svn repository, and wants those changes to be 
> committed back.
> 
> So my assumption was that he would do something like maintain his 
> local-only changes as StGIT patches that never get committed to git. His 
> other changes would get committed from StGIT to git, and from there he'd 
> do his normal git-svn dcommit. Or maybe git-svn dcommit followed by stg 
> rebase since git-svn dcommit creates new revision IDs.

You certainly could do local versioning this way, but it isn't how I accomplish the same thing. I keep another branch on top of my "public" svn commits for local stuff. If I always run git-svn dcommit from the public branch, the local changes will stay local. After committing, I just have to rebase the local branch on onto git-svn.

-- 
-Steven Walter <stevenrwalter@gmail.com>
"A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion,
butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance
accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders,
give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new
problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight
efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects."
   -Robert Heinlein