* Peter Rosin wrote on Sat, Jan 24, 2009 at 08:47:03PM CET: > Den 2009-01-24 14:03, skrev Ralf Wildenhues: >> * Eric Blake wrote on Sat, Jan 24, 2009 at 02:00:15PM CET: >>> According to Ralf Wildenhues on 1/24/2009 2:37 AM: >> >> Ah yes, that sounds like it was the problem here. Surely that makes >> criss cross merging (which we are effectively doing ATM) between two >> branches a bit more fun. In the end, we might have to declare that the >> order of, say, master, is the one we'd like to have. Maybe we can >> enhance git-merge-changelog to allow for such a prioritisation (sp?). > > Yes, I'm using git-merge-changelog. I don't see how which branch is > 'upstream' might make the merge driver mess up the ordering. When > merging a bunch of commits from one branch to another, the ChangeLog > entries should appear in the order the corresponding changes were > made in the other branch. Sounds pretty simple. But at the same time, > I acknowledge that what seems like a SMOP is not always that S...
Well, I think it really was because the driver's and your idea of "upstream" diverged. I found the long comment near the beginning of the main function of git-merge-changelog intructive (also didn't know about GIT_UPSTREAM or GIT_DOWNSTREAM before): <http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/gnulib.git/tree/lib/git-merge-changelog.c> Hope that helps. Cheers, Ralf
