Pushing into origin/master with a new change description

[Morten Volden]

2012/8/5 Andreas Pakulat <apaku at gmx.de>

> Hi,
>
> On Sun, Aug 5, 2012 at 10:42 AM, Morten Volden <mvolden2 at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Not quite sure if I broke something in the remote repo or not (I
> sincerely
> > hope not), so just to make sure.
>
> It does not look like anything was broken, although the gitk history
> could look a tad bit nicer.
>
> > I took the changes made in my local development branch (for both
> > kdevplatform and kdevelop ) and merged them into my local master.
>
> It seems you first merged master into your local branch regularly and
> also directly before pushing which is why the merge of
> outputview-extension into master was a 'fast-forward' . Thats why
> there was no dedicated merge-commit saying 'outputview-extension was
> merged into master' anymore. As Ivan already said, you could prevent
> this with git merge --no-ff.
>

Thanks Andreas and Ivan for your replies. I'm sorry to bring up off-topic
stuff that basically originates from me not reading the manual properly.


>
> > Browsing the remote repository I see that there is no revision number to
> > these changes and there is no change description.
>
> If you talk about the git merge outputview-extension done in your
> local master branch, then yes since there was no commit created for
> this.
>
> > What I really wanted was to have a single change description for all the
> > small commits that was made in the development branch. I naively expected
> > git to present me with the option to do this at some point in the
> process.
>
> See the git merge manual, if it can do a fast-forward then it'll
> prefer that by default. A separate merge-commit is only inserted when
> using --no-ff or if the a fast-forward is not possible.
>
> > So the question is:
> >
> > a) Is the remote repository broken?
>
> No.
>
> > b) Is there some way to fix the change description in the remote repo?
>
> No. You need to make sure the history is as you want it before
> pushing. Personally I find gitk very useful for this.
>

Great :-)

I'll be pushing the changes to kdev-custom-buildsystem in a short while,
let's see if I can do the merge correctly this time :-). I'll most
definitely take a look at gitk - Thanks!


> Andreas
>
> PS: There are technical ways of changing the history, but you cannot
> do this yourself (requires sysadmins giving you force-push rights
> temporarily) nor is it really necessary in this case.
>
> --
> KDevelop-devel mailing list
> KDevelop-devel at kdevelop.org
> https://barney.cs.uni-potsdam.de/mailman/listinfo/kdevelop-devel
>



-- 
- When the split is pulled, mr. Grenade is no longer our friend
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kdevelop-devel/attachments/20120805/ead30675/attachment.html>