[racket-dev] Git

From: Robby Findler (robby at eecs.northwestern.edu)
Date: Fri Jan 7 14:44:36 EST 2011

On Fri, Jan 7, 2011 at 1:39 PM, John Clements <clements at brinckerhoff.org> wrote:
> On Jan 7, 2011, at 7:42 AM, Robby Findler wrote:
>> Another question: what if I commit something just for the purpose of
>> moving to another machine and I don't want that commit to show up in
>> the main repository? Is that possible? (My tree is currently in that
>> state; it is one commit ahead of plt/master but that commit message is
>> a lie-- I've just started to do that job; ordinarily I'd do git commit
>> --amend to add more stuff to it, but now I'm worried about that.)
> Taking a step back:  is there really anything wrong with such commits?  Given that drdr and e-mail alerts are based on pushes rather than commits, it seems not unreasonable to just let those be intermediate commits.  I can see that it's a bit easier to give a nice name to a single big commit, but if the alternative is the fancy dance that this thread is suggesting, it seems like it might be simpler just to go with the simple solution (tautology alert).

IIUC, avoiding merges is actually the simpler solution overall.

In this particular example, the merge came about because I issued the
wrong command and Stevie pointed out that getting rid of it required
running the same command that I should have run to get things in the
right state in the first place.

More generally, running "git pull" (just like that, without, say
--ff-only or --rebase) is, I agree with Stevie, a bad idea (because it
does two things: downloads and merges). If you're doing something
complex like we're talking about you want to see the two steps one at
a time as it is easier to fix problems after the first step before the


Posted on the dev mailing list.