Re: EWW bugs should be fixed on emacs-25 branch

[John Wiegley]

>>>>> Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> writes:

>> In general, Git handles "not duplicating work you've cherry-picked into a
>> branch" quite well.

> AFAIK, Git doesn't track cherry-picks in the DAG.

What it does track are "patch ids", that is, the SHA of the diff represented
by a given commit against its parent:

    https://www.kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-patch-id.html

This allows the merging algorithm to know whether it's attempting to bring in
a change that has already been seen on the target branch.

  "git cherry can compare a branch with its upstream branch and find which
  commits have been upstreamed and which haven’t. This command is particularly
  clever because, thanks to git patch-id, it can correctly spot when a commit
  has been upstreamed, even when the upstreaming process resulted in changes
  to the commit message, line numbers, or whitespace."

    (from http://blog.adamspiers.org/2013/09/19/easier-upstreaming-with-git/)

So the theory is, you _should_ be able to cherry pick commits from one branch
to another, and then act as though it never happened with respect to merging.

-- 
John Wiegley                  GPG fingerprint = 4710 CF98 AF9B 327B B80F
http://newartisans.com                          60E1 46C4 BD1A 7AC1 4BA2