Re: how to use git merge -s subtree?

From: Sean <seanlkml@sympatico.ca>
Date: Jan 6, 2008, 02:13 UTC
Message-ID: <BAYC1-PASMTP01FC193EA959D148F19374AE4E0@CEZ.ICE>
In-Reply-To: <flpah7$beg$2@ger.gmane.org>

On Sun, 06 Jan 2008 02:22:47 +0100 David Soria Parra <sn_@gmx.net> wrote:

Show 8 quoted lines

> > Here's another way that is perhaps a little cleaner:
> > 
> > $ git remote add -f B /path/to/B
> > $ git merge -s ours --no-commit B/master
> > $ git read-tree --prefix=sub/ -u B/master 
> > $ git commit -m "subtree merged B"
> 
> that works perfectly but it doesn't preserve the history, does it?

David,

Yes, the reason to start with the "--no-commit" merge is so that the history is properly connected once you do the final commit step. However, I should have noted in my original message that none of the steps actually use the subtree merge. Instead they simply prepare a repository such that future merging can be done with:

   $ git merge -s subtree B/master.

Cheers, Sean