Re: [RFC][StGit PATCH] Add support for merge-friendly branches
From: Catalin Marinas <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-15 22:46:52
2009/5/28 Karl Hasselström [off-list ref]:
On 2009-05-28 12:12:42 +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote:quoted
The patch proposes a new StGit command called "publish". This command allows one to develop patches normally on a StGit branch but publish the stack changes to a separate, merge-friendly branch whose history is not re-writable.Hmm, interesting. I don't think I'd want to use a command like this myself, but I can see how it might be useful.
For me it is useful. I publish a kernel tree with over 100 patches. Later I find that one patch is buggy. The current merge-friendly solution is to add another patch but I may want to just update the buggy patch as it's easier when time comes to submit upstream. This, however, rewrites the history. So with the "publish" command I just generate another commit on top of the public branch and I always end up with the same tree as on my stack.
quoted
+ # check for same tree (already up to date) + if public_tree.sha1 == stack.head.data.tree.sha1: + out.info('"%s" already up to date' % public_ref) + return + + # check for rebased stack. In this case we emulate a merge with the stack + # base by setting two parents. + merge_base = repository.get_merge_base(public_head, stack.base) + if merge_base.sha1 != stack.base.sha1: + public_head = __create_commit(repository, stack.head.data.tree, + [public_head, stack.base], options) + repository.refs.set(public_ref, public_head, 'publish') + out.info('Merged the stack base into "%s"' % public_ref) + returnHmm. Couldn't the merge base conceivably be higher up in the stack? Like, right at the beginning, don't we have public_head == stack.head? That would be caught by the "same tree" check" a bit earlier, but after adding another patch, don't we have public_head == stack.head^ ? Which would give merge_base == public_head.
We could have public_head == stack.head^... but that's not an issue. The merge_base above is checked against the base of the stack rather than the top as we assume that the base isn't volatile. So even if public_head is the same as some patch commit, the merge_base above would always be the base of the stack. Only if the stack base was updated, we get a different merge_base (equal to the previous stack base).
quoted
+ def get_merge_base(self, commit1, commit2): + """Return the merge base of two commits.""" + sha1 = self.run(['git', 'merge-base', + commit1.sha1, commit2.sha1]).output_one_line() + return self.get_commit(sha1)This funcion should probably return a list of zero or more merge bases. See the --all flag to git merge-base.
OK, I'll add this and check the stack base against this set(list). -- Catalin