From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1RYsI0-0003Re-Nh for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 09 Dec 2011 04:42:29 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id C3DB521C103; Fri, 9 Dec 2011 04:42:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtprelay01.ispgateway.de (smtprelay01.ispgateway.de [80.67.31.28]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8541821C103 for ; Fri, 9 Dec 2011 04:42:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [85.179.18.203] (helo=[192.168.1.2]) by smtprelay01.ispgateway.de with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.68) (envelope-from ) id 1RYsHp-0005LB-F8 for gentoo-catalyst@lists.gentoo.org; Fri, 09 Dec 2011 05:42:17 +0100 Message-ID: <4EE1919B.5000308@gentoo.org> Date: Fri, 09 Dec 2011 05:42:03 +0100 From: Sebastian Pipping User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:8.0) Gecko/20111118 Thunderbird/8.0 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-catalyst@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-catalyst@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-catalyst@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-catalyst] rfc: merging catalyst git branches References: <20110627044433.GA9772@linux1> <20111208194623.GA2416@linux1> <4EE16A9A.4090609@gentoo.org> <20111209031956.GA11180@linux1> In-Reply-To: <20111209031956.GA11180@linux1> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Df-Sender: c3BpbmctZ2VudG9vQGJpbmVyYS5kZQ== X-Archives-Salt: 23920df0-7257-4bb5-bf3a-1b00a7de45c8 X-Archives-Hash: 918beffe48c1f2ae8f11ae444c86b390 On 12/09/2011 04:19 AM, William Hubbs wrote: > Hi Jorge, > > Ok, no problem, I'll go back to the #git channel tomorrow and > investigate how to do that. Have you received my other mail with notes on git commit-tree and how it can help here? It was sent "Fri, 09 Dec 2011 00:43:45 +0100". > I would prefer to do it without merge commits if possible What would be the gain here? >, but that may > mean a forced update. Are you ok with that? I would rather not see that. Is there is a problem with the git commit-tree approach that you see but I don't? Please let me hear about it. Best, Sebastian