Re: CEDET Merge

[David Engster <deng@randomsample.de>]

Edward Steere writes:
> Given that we might be moving from upstream entirely it might be worth
> it to keep the commit history if we can though.  I know that git won't
> make is easy.

The problem with using git is that you will have to edit each commit
anyway, at least that's my experience. You usually need to fix up the
ChangeLog entries in the commit message to conform with the Emacs file
layout. Also, one needs to remove entries which touch files that are not
in Emacs, or which are from authors who haven't signed papers with the
FSF.

> If we do go with patching though, and the changes are going to appear
> in the changelog then how are we going to go about doing that?  Would
> we use the add-change-log command on all of the commits since the last
> merge?
>
> One disadvantage of all of this is that git blame results would be
> more difficult to interpret because the change and author would be
> documented elsewhere.

Things have gotten easier since the actual ChangeLog files get generated
from the commit message. I would try to manually commit the changes with
proper commit messages, so we would retain the history with the
exception of the date of the change, which would be from the day of the
merge.

-David