On Sat, Jan 16, 2010 at 08:53:22PM +0100, Thomas McGuire wrote: > On Saturday 16 January 2010 20:36:12 Thomas McGuire wrote: > > On Saturday 16 January 2010 19:32:47 Thiago Macieira wrote: > > > Merges in Git always merge all commits, never any less. That's a > > > definition of merge. [..] You design your branches so that all commits > > > are mergeable. > > > > I hope I can still merge the commits one by one, instead of all in one go. > > Because of the KDE3 to KDE4 port needed for our commits, those commits are > > inherently unmergable without manually resolving conflicts. > > Ignore that, Thomas Z. said this is easily possible. > yes, as long as you keep the order.
for the kde3-based branches i wouldn't use git's branch merging - i don't even think you'd manage to produce as sensible tree for that (basically, you can only merge branches which started in git, otherwise your history will become a royal mess). the alternative to merging is cherry-picking, which is basically svnbackport. but git doesn't have an svnmerge tool to keep track of cherry-picked and even more blacklisted commits ... _______________________________________________ Kde-scm-interest mailing list [email protected] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-scm-interest
