Martin Langhoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 8/23/05, Magnus Therning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> It is however a quite common use case, especially among Linux kernel >> developers: > > yes, but it's done in StGIT, not GIT (before I'd have said: it's done > in quilt, not BK). StGIT is a patch-manager that is very adept at > that. It makes no pretense of keeping track of a project history. It > keeps track of a stack of patches that are very malleable -- you can > edit _the patch_ without recommitting. I think it keeps some history > of your edits of the patch even, but I may be wrong about that.
I used to preserve all the history of a patch but realised that the repository would be left with a lot of meaningless commits since people tend to save a patch without it being in a stable stage (maybe only to go back and forth between different patches). Somebody proposed a 'freeze' command and that only the frozen states of a patch should be preserved in a history. This makes a lot of sense but there are some ongoing discussions about how it is best to achieve this (since this history shouldn't probably be visible to somebody pulling the latest changes from your repository). -- Catalin _______________________________________________ Gnu-arch-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-arch-users GNU arch home page: http://savannah.gnu.org/projects/gnu-arch/
