GIT rebase changes
mstefani at redhat.com
Tue Jan 17 16:16:21 CST 2006
I hate to reply to myself, but ...
Michael Stefaniuc wrote:
> Mike McCormack wrote:
>> The GIT guys have made rebase and pull incompatible, and to use rebase
>> (which is likely what we want to do for Wine), you must use "fetch"
>> then "rebase", not "pull" (which does a merge).
> Depends if you want to keep your old history or not. "git pull" works
>> See: http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/365410
>> The error message that you get if you use "pull" then try to "rebase"
>> with newer version of GIT is pretty useless:
> I run into this yesterday. My master had the same code but different
> history than origin. Did a git rebase (after branching my master so i
> can keep my old history) and expected it to make master identical to
> origin. I know i can achieve the same by copying the origin head over to
> the master head but that would be like cheating.
> I'm still pondering what makes more sense:
> - to keep my old history, or
And this screws you up when you do git-format-patch. My VarCmp patches
in my master tree where composed out of a ton of separate small patches
(took me some time to have that function figured out) and now
git-format-patch dumped those out too even that my master branch and
origin where code wise the same. Quite annoying.
> - rebase to origin every now and then to easier spot the differences
> between master and origin.
Mike, you were right, "git rebase" is what we want to use. But if you do
not have patches sent to upstream "git pull" works too and it's faster
Michael Stefaniuc Tel.: +49-711-96437-199
Sr. Network Engineer Fax.: +49-711-96437-111
Red Hat GmbH Email: mstefani at redhat.com
Hauptstaetterstr. 58 http://www.redhat.de/
More information about the wine-devel