[Gnu-arch-users] Re: microbranches: prism-merge vs multi-merge

[Julian T. J. Midgley]

In article <address@hidden>,
Miles Bader  <address@hidden> wrote:
>Florian Weimer <address@hidden> writes:
>> Is there some fix to make the branches "micro" again?  If development
>> continues for some time, they wil accumulate patches from the upstream
>> branch, which means that branches aren't really *that* cheap.
>
>The `obvious' way would be to re-tag from the upstream branch instead of
>merging from it, but I've always been afraid to do this, as you always
>hear about problems with mixed commit/tag branches.

Or to have a tool for forking a new set of microbranches from the
latest revision of the devel branch (after the upstream merge) and
replay or star-merge the changes from the old microbranches into the
new ones.

This exchanges microbranch-bloat for branch proliferation, which seems
a little cleaner.

Julian





-- 
Julian T. J. Midgley                       http://www.xenoclast.org/
Cambridge, England.
PGP: BCC7863F FP: 52D9 1750 5721 7E58 C9E1  A7D5 3027 2F2E BCC7 863F