avoiding cluttered history?

[Isaac Jurado]

Redirecting back to the list.

On Thu, Nov 11, 2010 at 4:26 PM, Ed Keith <e_d_k at yahoo.com> wrote:
> --- On Thu, 11/11/10, Isaac Jurado <diptongo at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> I'm not sure what you are trying to achieve, but I think
>> that you want
>> to, somehow, "collapse" all the experimental work (probably
>> scattered
>> among various backup commits) into a single
>> changeset.  In that case
>> you can just make a patch containing all the changes you
>> want to apply
>> as one and apply it to the master repo/branch, then drop
>> the
>> experimental repository.
>
> That is exactly what I wish to do.
>
> What is the advantage of making a patch over copying checking the final file into the maste repo, and pushing it up stream?

If you have a single file there is no real advantage (you didn't
mention that in your first email).  For multiple files is just the
right way because if you enable git patches you can handle more
operations than just file editions, additions and deletions: you can
also cover execution bit changes and renames.

-- 
Isaac Jurado

"The noblest pleasure is the joy of understanding"
Leonardo da Vinci