[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Two branches, slightly different set of files

From: Jean Helou
Subject: Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Two branches, slightly different set of files
Date: Sat, 01 May 2004 11:49:56 +0200
User-agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.5 (X11/20040306)

Erik de Castro Lopo wrote:

On Sat, 1 May 2004 08:33:10 +0100
Stig Brautaset <address@hidden> wrote:

On May 01 2004, Erik wrote:
I have used branches successfully before, but never had a branch
where there are files that only exist in one branch. Does anyone
have experience of this? How is it likely to work?
It works fine. Just tag into a new branch and delete the files you don't
want showing up there. Then do a sync-tree from the other branch. After
this you can star-merge between the trees without the deleted files
showing up in the public branch. When you merge in patches that touch
the "secret" files arch will leave directories around with the patches
it didn't manage to apply because the files were missing.

Oh, cool. Thats even better than the config approach.

Except that if you add a new "private" file to the "private" branch, you will have to delete it from the public branch after the next star-merge. and this each time you add one.

About your question to configs,AFAIK commiting in the root tree does not commit the subtrees.



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]