From: Michael Poole <mdpoole@troilus.org>
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2010 02:15:05 GMT
Subject: Re: Groups of commits
Message-ID: <87sk6ge312.fsf@troilus.org>
In-Reply-To: <j2u43d8ce651004271859t8f306261n330004142a42b6df@mail.gmail.com>

John Tapsell writes:

> Hi all,
>
>   In my work place, we have a lot of strict rules to get something
> committed.  The code has to pass against a large test suite, it has to
> be tested on different hardware, and so on.
>
>   The problem is that it forces everyone to have one single large
> commit for a week's work.  All the intermediate stages get squashed
> and that history forever lost.
>
>   It would be nice to have a commit in the repository, treated as a
> single commit for all purposes, but then be able to split it into
> multiple commits if necessary.
>
>   Any ideas?

Isn't that what topic branches are for?  When development is done on a
short-lived branch (hopefully one with a descriptive name), the only
commit that needs to go through that process is the merge onto the
integration branch.

Michael Poole