[FFmpeg-devel] [RFC] Some git questions
Mon Feb 14 12:37:49 CET 2011
On date Saturday 2011-02-05 13:52:43 +0100, Diego Elio Petten? encoded:
> Il giorno sab, 05/02/2011 alle 13.24 +0100, Stefano Sabatini ha scritto:
> > I tend to do a lot of rebasing to my local branches, for getting
> > each patch "series" in shape before committing to the main repo.
> > Supposing that both users and contributors pull from the repo, how
> > would that affect their workflow?
> I'm not sure if it might apply to everybody but I'll share my personal
> way to deal with these issues, since I have at some point shared these
> concerns myself.
> Unless I'm actively maintaining a side branch that needs to be
> integrated into master from there on (which is usually only the case for
> feng), I don't tend to have a "merged" branch at all. Locally, I have a
> topic branch that I keep rebasing; on the public side, rather than
> pushing the branch as-is (which is going to cause trouble to people
> tracking it), I push it as a dated branch instead.
> As an example check my ffmpeg repo at gitorious
> The trick is in the push command
> git push gitorious staticize:$date-staticize
I'm adopting your same scheme here:
What do you do with outdated branches? Do you keep or delete them?
> Also, locally I use stgit to be able to move in the series of patches,
> and edit things that weren't right in the first place.
What's the point of using stgit?
I had a look at it when I switched to git (my previous workflow was
based on SVN+quilt, so I naturally was looking for something similar
to quilt for managing stack of patches), but then I started to work
with branches and interactive rebasing, it worked quite well since
then, so I wonder what's the advantage of using stgit instead.
> Rather than using dates you could use incremental versions for the
> patches' series, by the way.
Thanks all for the replies.
FFmpeg = Funny and Fundamental Mournful Peaceless Extravagant Guru
More information about the ffmpeg-devel