[FFmpeg-devel] Confusing git merges

[Reimar Döffinger]

On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 02:44:51AM +0100, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 11:16:21PM +0100, Reimar Döffinger wrote:
> > On 19 Mar 2011, at 22:24, Michael Niedermayer <michaelni at gmx.at> wrote:
> > > On Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 07:48:32PM +0000, David Woodhouse wrote:
> > >> On Sat, 2011-03-19 at 20:32 +0100, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> > >>> Hi
> > >>> 
> > >>> I know alot of people have been confused seeing changes and then seeing them
> > >>> reverted, or seeing changes on the ML that arent in the merged version
> > >>> 
> > >>> I really hate it as well, but this is how 'git pull' works
> > >>> Unless we modify git or at least the mailing list hook these things will
> > >>> keep showing up.
> > >>> 
> > >>> when theres a merge, the hook posts all changes of the merged branch no matter
> > >>> if they are in the actual result or not.
> > >>> 
> > >>> i cant really do anything about it, except hacking the ML hook to filter it
> > >>> out
> > >> 
> > >> If I understand the problem correctly, I think the generally accepted
> > >> way to avoid it is: "Don't commit stuff and then revert it, in a tree
> > >> that you're then going to offer for upstream merging".
> > > 
> > > i have no control over the tree i pull from
> > > 
> > > i agree with the remainder of your mail but it doesnt help due to above
> > 
> > Would it be possible to somehow pull through an intermediate (local) repository or something like that?
> 
> Well having a local repo and cleaning  their stuff up before pulling means work

I didn't have the impression it would, but I admit I don't know.

> and git would only know it merged the local repo it wouldnt
> know about the remote ..

Yes, that is an issue. I was thinking along the lines
"maybe git somehow supports it or so".

> Thats not looking very convenient to me.

I just thought it might be worth bringing it up, maybe someone
with more git experience knows an efficient way of doing it.