From: Kyle Rose <krose@krose.org>
Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2008 23:08:03 GMT
Subject: Re: cookbook question
Message-ID: <47C73ED3.6000704@krose.org>
In-Reply-To: <20080228225838.GA31479@hashpling.org>


> I presume that origin/common contains changes to the common part of
> the config files that you want to apply to both machines. If the two
> machines' configs were originally branched from origin/common and then
> had there custom changes made and committed, you should just be able
> to merge subsequent changes from origin/common and not get conflicts
> unless there are genuinely changes to the parts of the configs that
> have been modified for the individual machines. I don't see a case for
> rebase in your example.
>
>   
The rebase just avoids unnecessary merge records.  What I really want is 
my changes placed on top of whatever the common head is at any one time, 
which by design means I would use rebase.  Aside from the cleanliness of 
the history, I'm not sure there is a real reason to do this.  But I like 
things clean. ;-)

Kyle