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 1RZ5L6-0001c6-MC for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 09 Dec 2011 18:38:39 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id C1D8B21C087; Fri, 9 Dec 2011 18:38:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtprelay03.ispgateway.de (smtprelay03.ispgateway.de [80.67.29.7]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 885A821C087 for ; Fri, 9 Dec 2011 18:38:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [85.179.20.16] (helo=[192.168.1.2]) by smtprelay03.ispgateway.de with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.68) (envelope-from ) id 1RZ5Ks-00027E-7l for gentoo-catalyst@lists.gentoo.org; Fri, 09 Dec 2011 19:38:18 +0100 Message-ID: <4EE25589.40507@gentoo.org> Date: Fri, 09 Dec 2011 19:38:01 +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> <4EE1919B.5000308@gentoo.org> <20111209161625.GA5998@linux1> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Df-Sender: c3BpbmctZ2VudG9vQGJpbmVyYS5kZQ== X-Archives-Salt: 9d75357a-ce01-4a77-8131-ee00ce510718 X-Archives-Hash: cab58f21d4d73b429541b65bc118f0a4 On 12/09/2011 06:37 PM, Matt Turner wrote: > What Sebastian was suggesting was this, which works (I just verified locally) > > git checkout master > git branch catalyst_3 # creates a branch identical to master called catalyst_3 > git branch -M catalyst_2 master # renames the catalyst_2 branch to master No, step three uses git commit-tree and git merge in my approach -- it's not a rename. Sebastian