[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Rewriting bzrmerge.el
From: |
Stefan Monnier |
Subject: |
Re: Rewriting bzrmerge.el |
Date: |
Sat, 15 Nov 2014 11:04:06 -0500 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.0.50 (gnu/linux) |
> So, with bzr, we could pretty easily commit only the meta-data of
> skipped commits, so that they were regarded as merged. But being the
> stupid content tracker that Git is, I think that ship has sailed.
AFAICT, there is no difference between Git and Bzr in this respect.
> We can of course cherry-pick a commit with the 'ours' merge strategy,
> but that will of course change the SHA1...
bzrmerge.el does not cherry-pick and neither should gitmerge.el.
It should identify those commits that are "backports" (or similar) and
merge them with the `ours' strategy (which will indeed leave the files
unchanged while affecting the metadata, AFAIK).
Stefan
- Rewriting bzrmerge.el (was: git transition issues), David Engster, 2014/11/15
- Re: Rewriting bzrmerge.el, Paul Eggert, 2014/11/15
- Re: Rewriting bzrmerge.el,
Stefan Monnier <=
- Re: Rewriting bzrmerge.el, David Engster, 2014/11/15
- Re: Rewriting bzrmerge.el, David Engster, 2014/11/15
- Re: Rewriting bzrmerge.el, Stefan Monnier, 2014/11/15
- Re: Rewriting bzrmerge.el, David Engster, 2014/11/21
- Re: Rewriting bzrmerge.el, Eli Zaretskii, 2014/11/22
- Re: Rewriting bzrmerge.el, David Engster, 2014/11/22
- Re: Rewriting bzrmerge.el, Eli Zaretskii, 2014/11/22
- Re: Rewriting bzrmerge.el, David Engster, 2014/11/22
- Re: Rewriting bzrmerge.el, Eli Zaretskii, 2014/11/22
- Re: Rewriting bzrmerge.el, David Engster, 2014/11/22