Re: merging individual files

> Chris Marshall venit, vidit, dixit 14.08.2009 16:31:
>> Michael J Gruber <git <at> drmicha.warpmail.net> writes:
>>>> This strikes me as not too bad of a procedure, as long as there is a 
>> graceful
>>>> way of determining the most recent common ancestor of br1 and master.  
>> What's
>>>> the simplest way of doing that?
>>>>
>>>
>>> That would be simply git merge-base master br1.
>>>
>>> BUT: The main problem here is that git is not file based, but
>>> revision/commit/tree based. In the above, you're basically losing all
>>> the history common_ancestor_commit..br1 which produced br1's version of
>>> f1 and f2, in the sense that a git log master will not show that part of
>>> the history at all.
>>
>> Well put, I agree.  One of the main arguments I am going to use to try to 
>> convince my fellows to switch from perforce to git is the usefulness of git 
>> blame.  I would be defeating that with my procedure.
>>
>>>
>>> If it makes sense to change f1 and f2 without changing f3 that probably
>>> means that the pertinent commit should have been split. Is it an option
>>> for you to rewrite br1's history? That would be the most gittish solution.
>>
>> Yes, I like the idea of rewriting br1's history.
>>
>> So, given that f1, f2, ..., fn were changed together in one commit X on br1, I 
>> want to break f1 and f2 out of X and put them into X', then leave the rest of 
>> the f3,...,fn changes in Y'.
>>
>> Let's say X was the last commit on br1.  
>>
>> What would the commands to do that look like?
>>
> 
> If you're on br1, I would:
> 
> git rebase -i X^
> # change "pick" to "edit" in front of X in the list you get
> git checkout X^ -- f3 f4 f5
> git commit --amend
> git checkout X -- f3 f4 f5
> git commit

> 
> For the 2nd commit, using the -c option may be beneficial.
> 
> Cheers,
> Michael
>