rid backend seems to be initialized twice?

simo idra at samba.org
Sat Oct 13 15:47:08 GMT 2007

On Sat, 2007-10-13 at 10:23 -0500, Gerald (Jerry) Carter wrote:
> Hash: SHA1
> simo wrote:
> > Nice, command, I assume you imply making an unrelated commit is the way
> > to go, or should I do this after git-cherry-pick fails and ask me to
> > resolve conflicts?
> > This I guess would keep the following change linked to my original
> > commit to v3-0-test, is there any value in trying to keep the commits
> > related?
> git-merge merges all commits to each commit maintains the original
> SHA1 hash.  But git-cherry-pick simply does a diff/patch and commits
> using the original committer information (including timestamp).  But
> the cherry-picked hash is almost always different (haven't tried
> cherry-picking HEAD from same tree to see if the SHA! hash is the
> same).
> In these cases, you ported a fix from another branch so it is
> not a merge of the original fix and I think it is more confusing
> to try to associate it with the original change since the patch
> is against different files.

Ok, in this case I will just patch v3-2.

> This is one major reason why I would like to see us move away from
> all the file reorganization that people like to do so often.

This seem a deficiency in git.
I agree unnecessary file re-organization is not healthy, but the SCM
tool should not constrain us.
Anyway I think it is a minor issue, other VCS were not better in this
regard, and git has other major advantages.


Simo Sorce
Samba Team GPL Compliance Officer <simo at samba.org>
Senior Software Engineer at Red Hat Inc. <ssorce at redhat.com>

More information about the samba-technical mailing list