From: Tay Ray Chuan Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2010 05:25:39 GMT Subject: Re: Groups of commits Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <87sk6ge312.fsf@troilus.org> On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 10:15 AM, Michael Poole wrote: > 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. Just to add to the "merge in topic branches" idea - if you find that the commits are trivially fast-forwardable, you can still add a short note/cover letter with git merge --no-ff -m "Added in foo's work" -- Cheers, Ray Chuan