On 13/07/2017 23:20, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Nikolay Shustov <nikolay.shus...@gmail.com> writes:
>> My question was about how to robustly handle "multiple pending
>> commits" which in Perforce are represented by concept of pending
>> changelists.
>
> And in Git, they are represented by concept of commits that are not
> yet pushed out to the public repository to become the final history
> carved in stone.
If I may, I don`t think "multiple pending commits" is the issue here
(as that is indeed what a private branch is), but more something like
"multiple branches pending/live merge branch", or something.
To illustrate, let`s say this is our starting position:
(1) o---o---o (featureA)
/ \
---o---o---o---M (master, HEAD)
\ /
o---o---o (featureB)
We`re currently on commit "M", being a merge commit between our
"master" and two feature branches.
Now, what seems lacking, while still possible through a series of
steps, is an easy (single step) way to modify current state and
commit the change to the _feature branch_, while still being on the
"master" branch, still having everything merged in.
So after I make a "featureA" related change while on "M", to be able
to issue a single command, for example:
$ git commit --branch=featureA
... or:
$ git commit -b featureA
..., where "featureA" would need to be one of the parents of the
current commit we are at (commit "M", in our case), and get a
situation like this:
(2) o---o---o---A (featureA)
/ \
---o---o---o-------M' (master, HEAD)
\ /
o---o---o---/ (featureB)
Here, "A" is a new commit/change I`ve just made (while still being on
the "master" branch), and it is automatically commited to related
"featureA" branch, with merge commit "M" now recreated into "M'" to
hold the new "featureA" commit "A" as well.
I guess it would be a kind of alias to doing:
$ git checkout featureA
$ git add ...
$ git commit
$ git checkout master
$ git reset --hard HEAD^
$ git merge featureA featureB
... or something, where last merge step would need to remember
previous merge commit "M" parent branches and merge them again to
produce an updated "M'" merge commit.
In the same manner, it should be possible to drop a commit from the
feature branch in a single step, for example returning to the state
as shown in (1), or even "port" it from one branch to the other, like
this (without a need for it to be the last commit, even):
(3) o---o---o---\ (featureA)
/ \
---o---o---o-------M' (master, HEAD)
\ /
o---o---A'--o (featureB)
Something like "rebase on steroids", lol, keeping the HEAD where it
is, and its merge commit beneath updated.
This indeed seems similar to Mercurial`s patch "queues", except being
much better as everything is still version controlled at all times,
no additional tools needed to version control the patches (unless
that`s already been addressed in Mercurial as well, dunno).
And it still seems to be following Git`s "multiple commits per
feature, single feature per branch" spirit, just allowing for
easier/faster branch integration testing.
p.s. Even if my short sample might be flawed in one way or the other,
it should show the essence of the functionality we`re discussing
here, I think.
Regards,
Buga
