Re: [git-users] keeping two branches with partially different history in sync
Hi Igor, script and sample git repo attached. regards, Matevz -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Git for human beings" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to git-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. git-sync-repo-script.tar.xz Description: Binary data
Re: [git-users] keeping two branches with partially different history in sync
Hi Igor, yes, I was referring to "2 messages have been deleted" I think this happened because I left Michael's email in my reply and Google was not too happy with several Youtube links in that reply. Deleting Michael's contents and only writing my reply into the message resolved. thanks, Matevz -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Git for human beings" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to git-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [git-users] keeping two branches with partially different history in sync
Hi, I managed on simple repository with merge -s ours To ignore specific commits from the other side. However in real life repo things get broken pretty soon. A changes are propagated to B and then back to A and are lost in A, but remain in B :-) Matevz Langus -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Git for human beings" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to git-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [git-users] keeping two branches with partially different history in sync
Hi, 1,2,3 yes. 4: no, 100% of updates go from A to B and vice versa thanks, Matevz -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Git for human beings" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to git-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [git-users] keeping two branches with partially different history in sync
Hi, orphaned branch would work, but is very inconvenient for the process we have. we would like for some people to work on A and commit patches to A. other people to work on B and commit patches on B. Once a week we would like to get all A patches propagated to B and all B patches propagated to A. We would like to do that without cherry-picking as git's merge is really fantastical and never forgets. thanks, Matevz -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Git for human beings" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to git-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [git-users] keeping two branches with partially different history in sync
Hi, do you have any idea why my messages are being deleted? regards, Matevz -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Git for human beings" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to git-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [git-users] keeping two branches with partially different history in sync
Hi, > You have a common source "master". > You have two very large sets of changes from master, A and B. > You need to apply patches to both A and B. These patches will apply > cleanly to both. > But these patches will not apply to the last common "master" where A and B > diverged.' > > Is that correct so far? > CORRECT. 99% of cases they will apply cleanly on both, 1% with conflicts. Some of the patches might even apply to "old common master", but it would not compile or not work if it would compile. Old master is a third branch we do not want to maintain because it is useless without very large sets of changes in A and B. regards, Matevz -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Git for human beings" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to git-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [git-users] keeping two branches with partially different history in sync
Hi Michael, that would work normally, however we have a problem that we can not keep common master and we need to split the master to A and B. The base code changes are huge and there is no way for us to ever merge A and B branches completely. However the commits applied to A and B are compatible with both branches. Cherry-picking everything after conflicting commits from A to B and B to A would work, but we would like to avoid cherry-picking as it requires too much manual checking and attention. regards, Matevz On Tuesday, May 16, 2017 at 6:57:16 PM UTC+2, Michael Gersten wrote: > > > If so, I think that either doing merges from master to A and B, or > rebasing the few commits of A and B to the tip of master as you go, is the > right answer. > > Am I correct in thinking that A and B are per-client customizations to > your main code? > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Git for human beings" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to git-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
[git-users] keeping two branches with partially different history in sync
Hi, does anybody know how to keep 2 branches synced, each of them having 2 specific/private commits, which must not be pushed to the second branch. They have common history and common future. I want to have something like this: branch A:E--H--I--J--K--M / \ \ \/ master: A--B--C--D \ \ \ / \ \ \ \/ branch B: F--G--I--J--K--L At any point in the future I would like to use regular "git merge A" and "git merge B" to sync and B without loosing E,H and F,G respectively. This could be done by using orphaned branches A and B, but then I loose common history which I also need to keep. Any ideas? thanks, Matevz -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Git for human beings" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to git-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
