Re: yet another workflow question...

From: Johannes Sixt <j.sixt@viscovery.net>
Date: Oct 11, 2007, 14:37 UTC
Message-ID: <470E3545.4060005@viscovery.net>
In-Reply-To: <e2a1d0aa0710110711m77ca967bmd1d5ffd5d3099aab@mail.gmail.com>

Patrick Doyle schrieb:

Show 20 quoted lines

> I've been working on my project and I realize that I have 3-4 files
> modified with two orthogonal sets of changes.  (I didn't realize this
> until I said to myself -- "Self, I should really check in these files
> before I go too much further down this path".)  So I start "git
> diff"-ing the files and I find that most files have differences
> related to only one change or the other, but one file has differences
> related to both changes.
> 
> What do others do in this situation?
> a) Not allow themselves to get into this situation in the first place
> by careful planning?
> 
> b) Copy the file to "file.bothchanges", edit out one set of changes,
> commit that with one log message, edit back in the other set of
> changes, edit in the other set of changes, commit that with another
> log message?
> 
> c) Use some sort of automation to do option (b) for them?
> 
> d) Something else?

Use git-gui.

Stage the files relevant for the first change. In the file where you have an overlap with the second change, you can right-click in the diff pane and select "Stage Hunk for Commit" on the hunk relevant for the first change.[*]

Commit with a message.

Stage the remaining changes and commit again.

At this point, I usually check out HEAD~1, i.e. the state *without* the second change, and compile and test to make sure I have a bisectable history.

[*] Of course, this works only if the changes are not in the same hunk. If there are at least 3 unmodified lines between the changes, you can choose "Less context" until they are in separate hunks.

-- Hannes