On Thu, 18 Aug 2011 23:44:16 -0500
Norbert Thiebaud <nthiebaud@gmail.com>
wrote:
by doing that you would be creating new commits completely out of
order of the history... essentially creating a cactus on top of n old
repos history with a bunch of leaf-tags. (that is dead-end 18 commit
branch just to merge them all -- since at least .gitignore conflict,
that make octopus merge problematic -- with the tag at the end of
it... without any connection to the tag before or after it)
Merging the "last tag"+"all repo tags" should leave you with
non-leaf-tags, e.g. you do:
git checkout -b libreoffice_3.3.0 \
bootstrap_libreoffice-3.3.0.2
git merge sdk_libreoffice-3.3.0.2 writer_libreoffice-3.3.0.2 ....
git checkout master -- .gitignore
git add -u .gitignore
git commit -m "merged tag libreoffice-3.3.0.2"
git tag libreoffice-3.3.0.2
git merge bootstrap_libreoffice-3.3.0.3 sdk_libreoffice-3.3.0.3 ....
git checkout master -- .gitignore
git add -u .gitignore
git commit -m "merged tag libreoffice-3.3.0.3"
[repeat for each tag on 3.3.0]
[repeat all for each branch]
The tagbranch (do we actually have tags on master after the last
release branchoff?) for master should be merged to master with:
git checkout master
git merge feature/mastertags
There should be no conflicts on the last merge, since all commits on
the branch are already on master and the .gitignore is a
null-diff and it gets rid of the dangling head. In the end we would
have our release branches and master again.
That way you could also do a:
git log libreoffice_3.3.0.2..libreoffice_3.3.0.3
and similar things and get sensible results (over all repos).
Best,
Bjoern
--
https://launchpad.net/~bjoern-michaelsen
Context
Privacy Policy |
Impressum (Legal Info) |
Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images
on this website are licensed under the
Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License.
This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is
licensed under the Mozilla Public License (
MPLv2).
"LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are
registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are
in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective
logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use
thereof is explained in our
trademark policy.