RFC: migrating to git
dot at dotat.at
Wed Jan 12 12:59:22 CET 2011
On Wed, 12 Jan 2011, Claus Reinke wrote:
> In my understanding, the unorderedness of patch history in darcs is
> there to make distributed repos easier (fewer constraints: same set of
> patches, but not same order; can mix local commits and pulls from
> various repos, no need for a central repo),
Apart from variable patch ordering all of that is true of all DVCSs.
> and because darcs has a causal rather than a temporal view of patch
> history (which patch depends on which other patches, instead of which
> patch came first).
You can emulate darcs's patch re-ordering in git if you put each
independent sequence of patches on a separate branch. Then you can
re-merge the branches in whatever order you want. This is a fairly
common git workflow.
> In other words, always keep a branch/repo that only pulls from the central
> repos (no other source of patches).
It is normal in git to keep a pristine branch for each remote repository
that you pull from - git sets these branches up by default. There can be
many remotes in a git repository.
f.anthony.n.finch <dot at dotat.at> http://dotat.at/
HUMBER THAMES DOVER WIGHT PORTLAND: NORTH BACKING WEST OR NORTHWEST, 5 TO 7,
DECREASING 4 OR 5, OCCASIONALLY 6 LATER IN HUMBER AND THAMES. MODERATE OR
ROUGH. RAIN THEN FAIR. GOOD.
More information about the Glasgow-haskell-users