Patrick Ohly píše v Čt 14. 01. 2010 v 09:59 +0100: > On Tue, 2010-01-12 at 19:54 +0000, Stephen Kelly wrote: > > The "blocked" commits issue poses bigger problems I think. My knowledge of > > the internals of git is not strong, but I don't think it would be possible > > to identify commits to keep only in one branch and not merge with the rest. > > What you could do is a "git merge --no-commit". Then look at all changes > that would be committed and revert those that are not wanted in the > branch that is getting merged into. Commit. The next "git merge" will > only merge changes made since the last merge, so this manual selection > only needs to be done once per patch. > > Disclaimer: haven't tried this myself.
I thing, it would be better to do merge without '--no-commit' and then revert those commits that are not wanted. So everyone will see in log what patches are not merged. Question is, if we wish to see that. -- Josef Kufner <[email protected]>
signature.asc
Description: Toto je digitálně podepsaná část zprávy
_______________________________________________ Kde-scm-interest mailing list [email protected] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-scm-interest
