If I'm not misunderstanding you you should rebase your branch on top of staging. Then you don't have a merge commit.
HTH Urs Am 10. April 2016 21:50:59 MESZ, schrieb Paul Morris <p...@paulwmorris.com>: >Hi all, > >In CG 3.4.10 “Pushing to staging” it describes ways to push to staging >from a patch file or from a branch: > >http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.19/Documentation/contributor/pushing-to-staging > >I tried the branch instructions to avoid the extra step of having to >create a patch file, but it resulted in an additional commit message >about merging from the branch, which I saw in gitk. The instructions >say I "should see that staging is only ahead of origin/staging by the >commits from your branch." So I backed everything out and went with >the patch approach instead and that worked fine. > >Now I’m wondering… Is there a way to use the branch approach without >having that extra merge commit message? Does everyone just use the >patch approach? Maybe this should be covered in more depth in CG >3.4.10 since currently that merge commit is not mentioned and it is not >clear whether having it is ok/preferred or not. > >Thanks, >-Paul > > >_______________________________________________ >lilypond-devel mailing list >lilypond-devel@gnu.org >https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel -- Diese Nachricht wurde von meinem Android-Mobiltelefon mit K-9 Mail gesendet. _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
