Re: git methodology

[Bruno Haible]

Hi Paul,

> >   $ git stash
> >   $ git pull
> >   $ git stash apply
> >   # fix conflicts then  "git commit"  of the merged files
> 
> Alas, the first step doesn't work; git says "No local changes to
> save".

Then the two "git stash" commands were unnecessary; all that's needed is

      $ git pull
      # fix conflicts then  "git commit"  of the merged files

> I resolved the problem in my usual way, by removing my local
> repository, doing a fresh clone from Savannah, applying the patch,
> committing, and pushing.  I wish git were easier for me to use.

Ouch. Maybe it is because the git tutorials emphasize how to work with
branches and entire patches? I hardly do this. Most of what I do is to use
"git add" and "git commit" as a 2-stage commit pipeline, similar to the
1-stage commit pipeline of cvs. This way I do have to remember which files
I touched, but I don't need to do branches, merges etc. My last command were
these:

Fetched what Eric and you committed:

    $ git stash
    $ git pull
    $ git stash apply

Looked at what I still have to commit:

    $ git status

Undo a patch:

    $ git-show dced91140ad8eb666ed6cc6192fb486dadf623bb | patch -p1 -R
    $ vi ChangeLog

Made a commit for the undone wcwidth related changes:

    $ git commit ChangeLog doc/functions/wcwidth.texi m4/wcwidth.m4 
    $ git push

Commit the next wcwidth related changes:

    $ git diff modules/wcwidth-tests tests/test-wcwidth.c > xx
    $ vi ChangeLog
    $ git commit modules/wcwidth-tests tests/test-wcwidth.c ChangeLog
    $ git push

Looked at what I still have to commit:

    $ git status

Commit the next round of changes:

    $ git diff doc/functions/tdelete.texi lib/search.in.h m4/search_h.m4 
m4/tsearch.m4 modules/search > xx
    $ vi ChangeLog
    $ git commit doc/functions/tdelete.texi lib/search.in.h m4/search_h.m4 
m4/tsearch.m4 modules/search ChangeLog
    $ git push

etc.

You see, it's much like working with cvs.

Bruno