www-infrastructure-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Joe Schaefer <joe_schae...@yahoo.com>
Subject Re: [1/2] git commit: f92a685 -
Date Wed, 06 Jun 2012 12:57:01 GMT
Sounds interesting Jukka- especially if we could keep it well
correlated with the data in our "push logs".  Do share more

----- Original Message -----
> From: Jukka Zitting <jukka.zitting@gmail.com>
> To: infrastructure-dev@apache.org
> Cc: 
> Sent: Wednesday, June 6, 2012 8:12 AM
> Subject: Re: [1/2] git commit: f92a685 -
> Hi,
> On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 8:51 PM, Joe Schaefer <joe_schaefer@yahoo.com> 
> wrote:
>>  Merge commits do peculiar things- part of what happened
>>  is that I committed my change locally first, then pulled
>>  to sync up with the central repo, then pushed back.  Somehow
>>  history gets reordered and that is supposed to be reflected
>>  in these merge commit notices.
> Diffs of merge commits are tricky as you'll either need to specify
> against which one of the two or more parent commits you're doing the
> diff, or use a three- or many-way diff notation to express all the
> changes included in the merge.
> A better approach IMHO is to send *push* instead of *commit*
> notifications. The notification message includes a log of all the
> commits being pushed, and a diff between the old and the new state of
> the pushed branch. This is closer to the way svn commit notifications
> work.
> I wrote a script for doing that for our Git repositories at work, and
> I can adjust it to work also for Apache if there's interest.
> BR,
> Jukka Zitting

View raw message