Re: merge into branch currently not active / checked out

Hi Junio,

If you plan to eventually ask somebody who integrates the 'master' to
pull from you, and keep the resulting development history clean, (1)
is _NOT_ a good reason to merge 'master' into your topics.  Because
after your topic finally is finished, when 'master' pulls it, it will
see many "senseless" merges from itself.

the problem is. Getting a patch into mutt takes several years. At least
it took for the hcache. So what I do is keep my patches up2date on top
of there HEAD. So I prefer topic branches. And my patches throw _once_
in 4 years a conflict that was not automatically resolved. I used
bitkeeper before, now I use git.

Such "an integration testing" is better done, instead, by forking a
'test' (perhaps throw-away) branch from 'master', and merging all your
topics into it.

I dislike it myself.

Also, if you do not publish your work-in-progress topics, you
might want to consider rebasing on top of 'master', instead of
'merging'.  Rebase can take the topic branch name and switch
your current branch for you when you give it, like so:

I don't push my work other than in patches that is, so I am going to
give it a try. I always wanted to try rebase, but I never actually did
try it.

Thanks,
        Thomas