On Mon, Jun 16, 2008 at 8:28 PM, Krzysztof Kowalczyk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> The problem that I have is of interleaved changes. I work for a >> little on patch A, then patch B, then patch A again, but A and B >> should be kept separate so that they can be easily reviewed. A and B >> may or may have dependencies on one another. > > Have a separate branches for A and B? (and then delete them when they > are merged and no longer necessary).
This is the approach I take for my git repository containing the import of the Firefox source code. Each patch I work on is in an individual branch. If patch B depends on A then branch B is based on branch A and I regularly merge the changes from A to B. When I need to get the actual patches to send upstream I use 'git diff': # Patch A git diff master..A >patcha.txt # Patch B git diff A..B >patchb.txt So the first gets the changes from the original code and the branch A. The second gets the changes between patch A and patch B. Chris. -- http://www.bluishcoder.co.nz _______________________________________________ fonc mailing list fonc@vpri.org http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc
