On 06/12/2013 12:37 PM, Ian Lynagh wrote: > On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 12:54:38AM +0200, Daniel Trstenjak wrote: >> >>> I guess [the merge commits] may not cause any actual problems, >>> but it's certainly nicer >>> not having them (which is what using submodules gives us). > > Just to clarify, my problem isn't so much that there are merge commits > (although it would still be nicer if there weren't), but that it is hard > to see whether we are in the same state as upstream, or to see what the > differences between us and upstream are. > >> I don't quite understand how you should get rid of these merge commits >> by using submodules, > > With submodules we can do > > cd libraries/Cabal > git reset --hard <an upstream commit id> > cd .. > git commit -a > > and we will jump to that commit, without needing to merge it with the > commit that we were at before. > >> You can get rid of these merge commit by using the '--rebase' option of git-pull. > > We can't rebase, as these patches are in everyone else's GHC tree.
Only if you have pushed the "ghc" tree. If it is only local, then rebasing is just fine. And, I would argue, desirable. For the record, I am in favor of moving everything to submodules. Geoff _______________________________________________ ghc-devs mailing list ghc-devs@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs
