From: Johannes Sixt <j.sixt@viscovery.net>
Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2009 07:14:45 GMT
Subject: Re: newb: Given a commit id, find which branches have it as an ancestor
Message-ID: <49BA07E5.2080701@viscovery.net>
In-Reply-To: <63BEA5E623E09F4D92233FB12A9F794302E0F9BA@emailmn.mqsoftware.com>

Kelly F. Hickel schrieb:
>> From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org [mailto:git-owner@vger.kernel.org] On
>> Behalf Of Johannes Sixt
>> Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2009 10:38 AM
>> To: Kelly F. Hickel
> 
>> $ git branch -a --contains the-sha1
>>
>> -- Hannes
>>
> 
> Thanks, that looks like a really useful command.
> 
> Unfortunately, in this case it didn't print anything out (neither did
> "git branch -r -a sha1").
> 
> What I'm beginning to suspect is that all the commits that should have
> gone to master went to some unnamed branch.
> Is that reasonable/possible/likely?  This commit has a full ancestry,
> but doesn't appear to be on any branch.
> 
> In the above question there's an assumption that if a branch exists
> without a name, then git branch -a --contains wouldn't print anything
> out, is that correct?

Correct.

Your best bet is perhaps that you create a branch at the commit

  $ git branch tmp-branch your_sha1

so that the commits are not lost, then you cherry-pick them to master.

-- Hannes