Hello Russ, On Mon, Jan 02, 2017 at 09:29:24AM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote: > Furthermore, it forces a rebased, clean representation of the patches, > which I for one hugely prefer to the mess that you get if someone was > packaging in Git and just randomly commits things directly to the > packaging branch intermixed with merges from upstream. A few releases > done that way will leave you almost completely unable to extract a rebased > patch set against the current upstream source. (I have made this mistake > so many times with my own packages.)
Aside from `git debcherry`, which was already mentioned, git itself can
get you this information. For example:
git log --oneline 1.2.3..debian/1.2.3-1 -- . ':!debian'
This will get you all commits which touched the upstream source that
have not been merged upstream. There can be as many merge commits as
you like in between.
> I think the forced rebasing is huge, and is a significant feature for me.
> But then, I'm a rebase-not-merge person in the perennial Git flamewar.
This is probably why we disagree :)
--
Sean Whitton
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
