Re: [PATCH] have merge put FETCH_HEAD data in commit message

From: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Date: Mar 22, 2007, 08:51 UTC
Message-ID: <7vd531veyi.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>
In-Reply-To: <20070322083330.GA16915@segfault.peff.net>

Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:

Show 9 quoted lines

> I don't think it necessarily means distrust; I always do a fetch +
> inspect + merge, and I am often fetching my own code to a different
> platform!
>
> My reason is that the inspect step takes an arbitrary amount of time,
> and I don't want to lose my place. That is, I might go eat dinner in the
> middle of the 'inspect' and then come back. By using my branch head as a
> checkpoint, I am recording "I have inspected up to my master"; when I am
> done inspecting, the merge moves my checkpoint forward.

Oh, I very much agree with you, but then I would just use another "inspection" branch, like:

	git checkout -b inspect-jeffs-work master
        git pull $jeff
        git log master..
        ... takes quite time.
        ... interrupted, goes back to work on _my_ master
        git checkout master
        ... does whatever
        git checkout inspect-jeffs-work
        ... continue
        ... looks good
        git checkout master
        git pull $jeff

        git log inspect-jeffs-work..master
	... things that jeff did since I inspected them on the branch

        ... If I do not like them ...
        git reset --hard HEAD^

The advantage is of course I can get interrupted at any time.