From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Leo Famulari Subject: Re: Ungrafting Date: Mon, 2 May 2016 14:39:43 -0400 Message-ID: <20160502183943.GD10321@jasmine> References: <20160501202057.GB7127@jasmine> <87shy0vb11.fsf@netris.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:49436) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1axIlM-0003xU-Jr for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 02 May 2016 14:40:14 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1axIlB-0007cJ-3D for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 02 May 2016 14:40:03 -0400 Received: from out5-smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.29]:35485) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1axIl8-0007ZT-RD for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 02 May 2016 14:39:57 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87shy0vb11.fsf@netris.org> List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" To: Mark H Weaver Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org On Mon, May 02, 2016 at 09:34:34AM -0400, Mark H Weaver wrote: > Leo Famulari writes: > > Core-updates was suggested on IRC. This would mean that after each graft > > commit, master would need to be merged into core-updates, and then the > > "ungrafting" patch could be applied. > In practice, this means that after applying the graft to master, master > should be merged into core-updates before applying the ungrafting commit > to core-updates. > > What do you think? I'm having a hard time seeing the difference between our suggestions. Can you clarify yours? To give more detail, here is what I was suggesting: 1) Apply a graft to master. 2) Merge master into core-updates. 3) Apply a commit to core-updates that "un-does" the graft and applies the bug fix without a graft. Apologies if my original email was unclear.