Re: VC mode and git

[Steinar Bang]

>>>>> "Stephen J. Turnbull" <address@hidden>:

> It did?  It's not clear to me.  I still haven't seen an explanation of
> how he ended up with a ton of modified files that he didn't touch,

He uses vc-dir.el which doesn't clearly distinguish between staged and
unstaged files, so it's quite possible that all but one of those files
(ChangeLog) are staged and ready to go, once he does a
 git commit

(I'm guessing here, but...)

> or how he's going to get past that safely.

I can't guarantee that he will get past that safely, but fixing the
conflict markers in ChangeLog, then
 git commit
 git push
(and probably)
 git pull
 git push

might get him there (if conflict in ChangeLog was all there was, the
"git commit" command will complain if there are more conflicted files).

> Nobody has mentioned him doing a diff against a public reference
> commit that *should* be where he started, in order to confirm that
> when he pushes he can succeed

Personally I never do that unless something fails, but then I mostly
work on feature branches when I work with others, so it's
 git checkout master
 git pull --ff-only
 git merge my-feature-branch
 git push

If the merge gets too messy or the push fails I can always go back to
the pre-merge conditons and start again (after doing the necessary
investigation).

> (preferably without making the DAG too ugly, as well).

The merge command is more robust than rebasing, so the emacs maintainers
have stated that they don't care about the ugliness of the DAG (which I
personally think is a wise decision).