On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 10:06:56AM +0100, Mats Peterson wrote: > Moritz Barsnick <barsn...@gmx.net> skrev: (16 mars 2016 09:59:00 CET) > >On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 09:17:55 +0100, Mats Peterson wrote: > >> >>>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>>> > > > >Why are always 10+ mails quoted, when none of the context is of > >interest? I'm tired of skipping all this stuff... I must find that mutt > >patch again. (Mats, this isn't personally directed at you. Though you > >"chains of thought" do extend "threads of mails" significantly.) > > > >> In any case, I don't see anything wrong with creating a patch that > >> includes those changes, as long as I attribute the author properly. > >It's > >> no different from writing it myself, once again. > > > >You don't get the concept: > >The "other upstream" or other branch has commits waiting to be merged: > >... > > -A- > > -B- > > -C- > > -D- > > -E- > > > >You are asking to commit "something like C". In the best case, this > >will become confusing when it comes time to merge C. > > > >In the worst case, it will bring conflicts when merging A, B, D and E, > >making so much more manual work for the merger. > > > >The only acceptable thing to bring forward C is to merge exactly that > >one commit ahead of time, if it's *really* important. But that requires > >you to do the prework on that: branch ffmpeg master, merge *exactly* > >that commit by cherry-picking (not rewrite something like it), commit > >it to your branch, and provide that branch with this one merge-commit, > >which can then be cherry-picked back into ffmpeg master. > > > >But why??????? What's so urgent? If you need that commit in order to > >base your experiments on it, just go ahead and do the branching and > >cherry-pick merging in your local clone, and work with that (and wait > >to submit it here until that commit you're waiting for is in master, > >and the dust around your own changes has settled - v23). Git makes > >this stuff so easy for you. > > > >Moritz > >_______________________________________________ > >ffmpeg-devel mailing list > >ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org > >http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel > > Using Git and "easy" in the same sentence is something I refrain from. But > thanks for the in-depth information, Moritz.
its easy git cherry-pick -x f8c34f4b8d62afad3f63cf3d9617d73735bef8c1^ git cherry-pick -x f8c34f4b8d62afad3f63cf3d9617d73735bef8c1 in this case work if your local git checkout knows of the commits and you need f8c34f4b8d62afad3f63cf3d9617d73735bef8c1^ as it does some whitespace messing the other alone would conflict a bit otherwise either way cherry picked and pushed [...] -- Michael GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB I have often repented speaking, but never of holding my tongue. -- Xenocrates
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
