Re: Staging/Master Merge - James' Patchy

[David Kastrup]

"Phil Holmes" <address@hidden> writes:

> If I could have worked out how to split them, while at the same time
> being able to keep track of what changes were still needed, I would
> have done. However, doing things like having a screech-boink.ly in
> new, with a screech-and-boink.ly in snippets, and remembering to keep
> checking that the docs were all up to date and the one in new could be
> deleted was too much for my brain.  The problem was that I believe I
> needed to get them into a single patch for the benefit of patchy, but
> I had them in six patches on my system. I git apply-ed each patch, but
> didn't remember to git add the files.
>
> TBH that seems a duff aspect of git.

No, it isn't.  git apply _only_ touches the work directory, so whatever
happens, git does not remember anything about it.  Use

git apply --index

if you want git to also _register_ the changes.

> Any other changes to the repo it can deal with.

No.  git does _not_ track _any_ change in the work directory unless you
commit it to the index.

> Add a file and you need to remember to git add it.
>
> I've now got an even more humungous patch which includes the added
> files. My preference would be to push to staging, patchy and revert if
> there's a problem.
>
> What's the syntax for a revert?

We use the staging branch exactly to avoid having to revert stuff.
Instead we reset staging.  Only stuff that percolated to master needs to
get reverted in order to remove it.

-- 
David Kastrup