Sorry, that original version didn't quite work. Pushed a new one that now includes a basic test.
On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 12:51 PM, Evan Martin <[email protected]> wrote: > git clone git://neugierig.org/git-ffwd.git > > Usage: > git checkout origin > git ffwd branchname > Aborts on any conflicts. > Patches welcome (some TODOs are in the code). > > On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 11:47 AM, Eric Seidel <[email protected]> wrote: >> For my use case: If there is more than one commit on a branch, then >> that is intentional history on my part. :) So yes. >> >> -eric >> >> On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 11:45 AM, Nico Weber <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> BTW, do you typically have useful history on these branches? >>>> Typically the reason to preserve history is for commit logs (which we >>>> drop when we commit the branch as a squash) or for merges (which we're >>>> breaking because we're rebasing). >>>> It would be a lot faster if it could forward-port a branch as a single >>>> commit instead of multiple. >>> >>> No, I usually don't have useful history in my local branches (most of >>> the time I upload to codereview after every commit anyway). >>> >> > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Chromium Developers mailing list: [email protected] View archives, change email options, or unsubscribe: http://groups.google.com/group/chromium-dev -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
