Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from February 2012
On Sun Jan 22 12:43:54 2012, sprout wrote: > On Sun Jan 22 04:07:46 2012, andreas.koenig.7os6VVqR@franz.ak.mind.de wrote: > > Appended is a patch to perlgit.pod with an advice. If I understood him > > right, the advice comes from Slaven Rezic. > > > > Can the Englich and Git native speakers please repair if I got something > > wrong? > > > > The advice was developed based on my experience with v5.15.5-81-gcfe287a > > which confused me so much that I even sent a bug report to the git > > mailing list which then turned out to be a false accusation: > > http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/188789 > > > > I hope this helps somebody in the future. > > perlgit already says to do this, about three paragraphs earlier: > > For larger sets of commits that only make sense together, or that would > benefit from a summary of the set's purpose, you should use a merge > commit. You should perform your work on a L<topic branch|/Topic > branches and rewriting history>, which you should regularly rebase > against blead to ensure that your code is not broken by blead moving. > When you have finished your work and performed a final rebase and test, > you can merge it into master like this (assuming your work was on the > branch C<< committer/somework >>): > > Notice ‘and performed a final rebase’ in the antepenultimate line. > > I like your patch, except I think it should modify (and possibly split) > the paragraph I cited, instead of adding a paragraph to the end of the > section. I’ve applied something inspired by your patch as bd3355a. Thank you. -- Father Chrysostomos --- via perlbug: queue: perl5 status: open https://rt.perl.org:443/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=108754Thread Previous | Thread Next