[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [Gnu-arch-users] How to avoid conflict when backporting/cherypicking

From: Aaron Bentley
Subject: Re: [Gnu-arch-users] How to avoid conflict when backporting/cherypicking
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 03:00:00 -0400
User-agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.5 (X11/20040306)

Matthew Dempsky wrote:
Aaron Bentley <address@hidden> writes:

Actually, I use sync-tree as part of a two-step operation I call "reject".
It sounds kinda neat to be able to say "oh, I'm
just going to reject that patch" and do so by pulling in their patch
log entries, but the consequence seems to be that later on if the
patch gets cleaned up or you change your mind, you've already screwed
with history.

If you change your mind about a reject, you just reject your rejection.

I think it'd be better to have another layer where you can specify
dont-care patches which tla missing would skip over -- an entry in
your patch log should mean that a patch has been *completely* merged
in and arch's history sensitive merging depends on this.

If you merge a patch *completely* you can still alter some of all of the changes that patch introduced, and you will change some of it, eventually in the course of the project's development. There's no difference between merging and undoing a patch vs only merging the logs. Arch's history-sensitive merging is the reason you'd do it in the first place-- it will be helped, rather than hindered, by a reject.


reply via email to

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