Re: Best way to generate a git tree containing only a subset of commits from another tree?
From: Andreas Ericsson <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-15 22:42:22
Junio C Hamano wrote:
Andreas Ericsson [off-list ref] writes:
>>If you have several topic branches, one for each series of commits,
quoted
you should be able to do an octopus, like so: $ git pull . <topic-branches-to-publish>Octopus is orthogonal to the issue at hand. Further, I suspect that the original repository by Anton is not that cleanly organized to have such topic branches -- otherwise the question would not have come up to begin with.
<sidenote> I've never understood what orthogonal means in this sense. "at a right angle" as in flagging for attention or the exactly counter-productive to what one should use? </sidenot>
quoted
If you *don't* have several topic branches, or if some commits aren't in topic-branches, you could try something like this (untested, although it shouldn't break anything except the for-linus branch which you can re-create fairly simply) $ for b in <topic-branches-for-linus>; do git checkout $b git rebase for-linus || (git reset --hard; echo $b >> to-merge) donequoted
# now merge what couldn't be rebased $ git checkout for-linus $ git pull . $(cat to-merge)Now you lost me here. When rebase refuses because of conflicting changes, you are doing "reset --hard" but I suspect you meant "reset --hard ORIG_HEAD" to recover the original head.
I actually meant to reset the for-linus branch, although it would have to be reset to the state it was before trying the rebase, which means creating and deleting a tag or some other marker. I really should install an alco-lock on my MUA.
Further, I would have expected you to be rebasing on top of linus, not for-linus, in case you may already have pulled other topic branches into it.
Perhaps. I said 'for-linus' to make sure there was an easy way to recover to state 1 in case of errors. I also rewrote the part above twice to account for topic branches, so it doesn't make much sense without the background thinking.
Your merging those branches that have conflicting changes on top of for-linus (that starts out at Linus's tip) is sensible, but one word of caution is the history contained within the topic branch should be sane. What are you going to do with branches that cleanly rebase on top of for-linus?
Nothing. 'for-linus' should be updated each time a rebase completes success-fully, so all the cleanly rebased branches should be in a linear commit-history on top of each other. Granted, most projects won't have many topic-branches (or other commit-chains) that rebase on top of each other like that, but...
quoted
... If your vanilla tree is up-to-date and he pulls from you before pulling from someone else or adding other commits this isn't necessary, although you'll have to do $ git checkout linus; git pull . for-linus to get the vanilla branch up to speed with Linus' HEAD.I am not sure I follow you here. If Linus hasn't pulled from you, you can either just keep asking (you do not have to update for-linus), or rebuild it based on more recent Linus's tip.
What I meant was that the thing he has in "for-linus" will match what Linus has in "master" verbatim if Linus doesn't have commits on top of his "master" that aren't in Anton's "for-linus" (originating from "linus"). That sentence didn't make sense to me right now.
$ git fetch linus ;# to update to Linus's tip
$ git checkout for-linus
$ git reset --hard linus
If Linus has pulled from you, there is nothing more than the
above for you to do.The above command would reset the "for-linus" branch to the state it had before he applied all his changes. I meant that if he wants to track Linus' exact HEAD in some branch he could do that by tracking his own if the changes since merge-base are identical. I was clearly complicating things by mentioning such a highly conditional exception.
If you want to rebuild for-linus branch,
(maybe because you fixed things in some of your topic branches),
after the above, you could:
$ git pull . this-topic
$ git pull . that-topic
...
This is nicer to Linus _if_ your topics overlap with recent
changes to the Linus's tree. Otherwise you do not necessarily
have to rebuild for-linus branch.But it's very nasty in case Linus has already pulled the changes, which was what I assumed he would have done. I was most likely a bit diffuse. Everything else seems to be at the moment, and I like to blend in. ;) -- Andreas Ericsson andreas.ericsson@op5.se OP5 AB www.op5.se Tel: +46 8-230225 Fax: +46 8-230231