Re: stgit - continue rebase after merge conflict?

From: Karl Hasselström <kha@treskal.com>
Date: Feb 27, 2008, 09:38 UTC
Message-ID: <20080227093808.GA7795@diana.vm.bytemark.co.uk>
In-Reply-To: <b0943d9e0802260856j6e9b0053ne4916149d8e4387c@mail.gmail.com>

On 2008-02-26 16:56:53 +0000, Catalin Marinas wrote:

> or (if you want to skip that patch):
>
> $ stg push --undo
> $ stg push next-patch..

Better use

  $ stg push next-patch..top-patch

which works even if you don't want to push _all_ patches.

> The 'rebase' command doesn't store any information about the state
> of the stack and cannot continue it. Maybe we'll do something in the
> next release as the refactored code has support for transactions.

Hmm, that's an interesting idea. Maybe an "stg resume" command that one would run after having resolved the conflicts.

One implementation would be to save a .stgit-todo file with contents like this:

  push foo
  push bar
  push baz

It would have to handle more than just pushes, however. For example, stg coalesce will try to first push the given patches in order, and then coalesce them, so for that case .stgit-todo might look like this:

  push bar
  push baz
  coalesce foo bar baz
  push frotz

We should be able to redefine each non-atomic stgit command in terms of such atomic commands, and get resumeability all over the place.

I'm not sure this is a good idea, but it is intriguing.

-- 
Karl Hasselström, kha@treskal.com
      www.treskal.com/kalle