On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 07:46:13AM -0700, keV wrote:
> Thank you for such a detailed response! I wasn't familiar with git-
> cherry-pick and git-rebase, so I've read manuals first. Now I believe
> I can understand your idea.
> One unclear moment. You say:
> - changes intended for the current branch only should be commited
> first;
> - changes intended for both current and master branches should be
> commited second;
> Why this order is important? Isn't cherry-pick able to pick any
> commits in any order?

You are correct.  The order isn't important.

It's only important in case the changes depend on each other.
It sounds like they don't in your example.

If they did depend on each other, then I think I suggested the
wrong order -- you'd want to commit the independent parts first
(likely these are for both master and current) and the
dependent parts afterwards (I'm assuming these would be for
the current branch only).

> One more question: as explained in 'git help rebase' the duplicate
> commits will be removed automatically by rebase engine. So, why do you
> recommend to use -i mode and remove them by hands?

That's right, rebase does it automatically.



You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Git 
for human beings" group.
To post to this group, send email to git-users@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
For more options, visit this group at 

Reply via email to