From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: David Kastrup Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Rewriting bzrmerge.el Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2014 18:50:10 +0100 Organization: Organization?!? Message-ID: <8761egmjzh.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> References: <20141027000718.F09B5382A66@snark.thyrsus.com> <87bno8y0rt.fsf_-_@engster.org> <838ujcfn1i.fsf@gnu.org> <87ppcowhhd.fsf@engster.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1416073850 5218 80.91.229.3 (15 Nov 2014 17:50:50 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2014 17:50:50 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Nov 15 18:50:43 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1XphUf-00039s-Vm for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 15 Nov 2014 18:50:42 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:41445 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XphUf-0004ff-Hv for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 15 Nov 2014 12:50:41 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:54965) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XphUV-0004c6-NL for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 15 Nov 2014 12:50:37 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XphUP-0004Ne-8p for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 15 Nov 2014 12:50:31 -0500 Original-Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3]:58222) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XphUP-0004NU-28 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 15 Nov 2014 12:50:25 -0500 Original-Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1XphUL-0001py-UW for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 15 Nov 2014 18:50:21 +0100 Original-Received: from x2f516dd.dyn.telefonica.de ([2.245.22.221]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sat, 15 Nov 2014 18:50:21 +0100 Original-Received: from dak by x2f516dd.dyn.telefonica.de with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sat, 15 Nov 2014 18:50:21 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 32 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: x2f516dd.dyn.telefonica.de X-Face: 2FEFf>]>q>2iw=B6, xrUubRI>pR&Ml9=ao@P@i)L:\urd*t9M~y1^:+Y]'C0~{mAl`oQuAl \!3KEIp?*w`|bL5qr,H)LFO6Q=qx~iH4DN; i"; /yuIsqbLLCh/!U#X[S~(5eZ41to5f%E@'ELIi$t^ Vc\LWP@J5p^rst0+('>Er0=^1{]M9!p?&:\z]|;&=NP3AhB!B_bi^]Pfkw User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:VtFBEvGlhqwAODw2c+vJtw8QxB8= X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 80.91.229.3 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:177215 Archived-At: David Engster writes: > Eli Zaretskii writes: >>> From: David Engster >>> 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. >> >> You mean, if I merge a commit, and then make another commit that >> undoes all the changes of the first one, that first commit will not >> appear in the DAG? I'd be surprised. >> >> Or are you saying that if I do the above, then merge again from the >> same branch, Git will again bring the same stuff and effectively undo >> my undo? > > No. Explicitly reverting the commit is one possibility that works, but > that's ugly and tedious, especially when the commit has conflicts (which > is pretty common, since this is often the reason why it should be > skipped in the first place). > > With Bazaar, you could gradually build up your merge in a series of > smaller merges using different strategies (granted, that involved using > the '--force' option, but nonetheless, it was possible). In the end, > this lead to one single merge commit from the emacs-24 branch, which was > nice and tidy. I was hoping one of the git experts around here could > tell me how to do that with git. git rebase -i -- David Kastrup