Henrik Grubbstr?m (Lysator) @ Pike (-) developers forum wrote:
>>The recommended practice is that for back/forwardports the commit id's
>>of the originating cherry-picked patches are mentioned at the bottom of
>>the new commit message.
>Unfortunately that won't help (if we) in the future use git for
>backports, since the new backports will get the same graphs once
>again.
No. The backports in Pike would be done in git using "git cherry-pick".
And as-is "git cherry-pick" does not create a parent reference, but
gives you the option of a textual reference in the free-form commit
message. This means that the current practice of creating extra parents
for the backports has to be altered into either:
- Textual references at the bottom of the commit message.
- Or usage of a new (native git) link which I'm trying to get included
into git as we speak.
>I believe the problem lies in how gitk determines what branch(es) a
>commit is on rather than on our use of grafts for backports.
That's what I thought first as well, and it might even be true, but it's
not what the git community wants to fix. It's either the first or the
second option above, and I'm pushing for the second at the moment.
>>This means that I'll have to regenerate the backport/forwardport way of
>>linking to modify the commit messages instead of the graft/parent list.
--
Sincerely,
Stephen R. van den Berg.
"Be spontaneous!"
