guix-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Rebasing guile-daemon branch onto master


From: Sandeep Subramanian
Subject: Rebasing guile-daemon branch onto master
Date: Sat, 28 Apr 2018 19:10:00 +0000

Hi all,

I was trying to rebase the guile-daemon branch onto the master branch
and I have some trouble doing it.

The interactive git rebase showed me that there are 932 commits to be
picked but most of them had no relation to the daemon code (Most commits
were package addition/update commits.) I also tried `git cherry master
guile-daemon`
and that too showed 932 "+ commits" and 0 "- commits".

The graph looks something like:

(78a5205)                              (2472f7a)
  (master-HEAD)
        *----------------*--------------------*-----------------------------*
          \           (c4395e7)                 \
            \                                           \
(e338c9b)
              \
  *-----------------------*-* (6dee54f - guile-daemon HEAD)
                \                                  (36cc971)
    /
                 *-----------------------*--------------------------------*
             (654c8a7)         (5e27bfc)                           (f5dfbaa)


A lot of commits on the guile daemon section of the branch are also found
between 78a5205 and 2472f7a. For example both c4395e7 and 5e27bfc
are the exact same patches and have the same patch-id. And almost all the
932 commits have a duplicate patch.

I think this is the reason why both rebase and cherry are showing a lot of
redundant commits.

To verify, I created an orphaned branch "orphan" from the 78a5205 commit and
and did `git cherry-pick 2472f7a..guile-daemon`. Then a `git cherry master
orphan`
revealed 30 "+ commits" and 902 "- commits". `git diff guile-daemon orphan`
was empty
and the 30 "+ commits" corresponded to the 30 commits by Caleb Ristvedt.

Shall I now rebase by picking only these 30 commits?

I don't know if what I am doing is right. I could use some guidance and
criticism now.

--
Sandeep (uniq10)



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]