From: Phillip Wood <phillip.wood123@gmail.com>
To: Alejandro Colomar <alx@kernel.org>, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: git-cherry-pick(1) -- path
Date: Sat, 11 May 2024 16:01:18 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3a48b2fe-78c0-41f4-9e60-4146f15dfa97@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bpjfsabhstkbuvo6ksj3owoxvutgquripmqmqi63ykaquhky2u@r7mfrwucgnye>
Hi Alex and Junio
On 11/05/2024 12:46, Alejandro Colomar wrote:
> Hi Phillip, Junio,
>
> On Fri, May 10, 2024 at 10:03:31AM GMT, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> Phillip Wood <phillip.wood123@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>>>> $ git format-patch --stdout -1 $ThatCommit -- $ThisPath |
>>>>> git am -3
>>>> Hmmm, I hadn't thought of that; very interesting!
>>>> Although I have some concerns with git-am(1); basically that it's
>>>> almost
>>>> clueless when there's a conflict.
>>>
>>> "git am -3" should be fine here as you're guaranteed to have the
>>> necessary blobs available to create conflicts - this is what "git
>>> rebase --apply" does.
>>
>> Good thing to point out. "am -3" is just as good for this purpose
>> and "almost clueless" is a derogatory comment that requires an
>> apology ;-)
>
> Huh, I am quite surprised by `git am -3`. I've tried it just now, and
> it's amazing. I certainly must apologize. :-)
>
> I tried it yesterday, but the patches were from a different repo, and
> not available locally, so it really didn't do anything. But now I tried
> it within the same repo, and it's really nice!
>
>>> As far as the implementation goes I haven't thought too deeply but I
>>> suspect we'd want to create a couple of trees based on the commit we
>>> want to cherry-pick and its parent filtered by the pathspec and use
>>> those in the tree-way merge with HEAD.
>>
>> If we were to use the ort machinery, it may not be too bad to use
>> the pathspec only at the final writeout phase.
That would be tempting if cherry-pick didn't have a "--strategy" option.
I think we need something more generic to cope with that.
>> That is, perform a
>> full cherry-pick in the in-core index, reset all the entries in the
>> in-core index back to HEAD that are outside the given pathspec, and
>> then write out the result to the working tree. That way, an old
>> change that was made to paths at the original location can be cherry
>> picked to a much newer tree after these paths have been moved to a
>> different location. Doing the same with the recursive machinery
>> would be missier but perhaps the more recent merge-tree that uses
>> the ort machinery to work purely in-core might be a good way to go.
My hope was that the changes required to create a couple of new trees
that are then used instead of the original commits when a pathspec is
given would be fairly localized.
> I didn't understand the last part well, but I guess I may do when I
> start researching into it. :)
>
> Apart from <builtin/revert.c>, do you recommend I look into any
> particular files?
sequencer.c. If we go for the "write new trees and use those in the
merge" approach then we'd need to change do_pick_commit() to create the
trees and we'd probably want to change do_recursive_merge() to take
trees rather than commits. We'd also need to add a new pathspec member
to struct replay_opts to pass the pathspec around.
Best Wishes
Phillip
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-05-11 15:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-05-09 22:32 git-cherry-pick(1) -- path Alejandro Colomar
2024-05-10 1:15 ` Junio C Hamano
2024-05-10 9:05 ` Alejandro Colomar
2024-05-10 10:00 ` Phillip Wood
2024-05-10 17:03 ` Junio C Hamano
2024-05-11 11:46 ` Alejandro Colomar
2024-05-11 15:01 ` Phillip Wood [this message]
2024-05-11 20:08 ` Alejandro Colomar
2024-05-12 15:35 ` Alejandro Colomar
2024-05-13 15:16 ` Phillip Wood
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=3a48b2fe-78c0-41f4-9e60-4146f15dfa97@gmail.com \
--to=phillip.wood123@gmail.com \
--cc=alx@kernel.org \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=phillip.wood@dunelm.org.uk \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).