We should implement it as
git fetch ...
git subtree merge ...
But we were instead just calling
git pull -s subtree ...
because 'git subtree merge' used to be just an alias for 'git merge -s
subtree', but it no longer is.
* 'master' of git://github.com/voxpelli/git-subtree:
Check that the type of the tree really is a tree and not a commit as it seems to sometimes become when eg. a submodule has existed in the same position previously.
We were trying to 'git checkout $prefix', which is ambiguous if $prefix
names a directory *and* a branch. Do 'git checkout -- $prefix' instead.
The main place this appeared was in 'git subtree add'.
Reported by several people.
If you (like me) are using a modified git straight out of its source
directory (ie. without installing), then --exec-path isn't actually correct.
Add it to the PATH instead, so if it is correct, it'll work, but if it's
not, we fall back to the previous behaviour.
As pointed out by documentation, the correct use of 'git-sh-setup' is
using $(git --exec-path) to avoid problems with not standard
installations.
Signed-off-by: gianluca.pacchiella <pacchiel@studenti.ph.unito.it>
Instead of merging in the history of the entire subproject, just squash it
all into one commit, but try to at least track which commits we used so that
we can do future merges correctly.
Bonus feature: we can actually switch branches of the subproject this way,
just by "squash merging" back and forth from one tag to another.
If any one of the parents is the same as the current one, then clearly the
other parent branch isn't important, so throw it away entirely.
Can't remember why I didn't do this before, but if I rediscover it, it
definitely needs a unit test.
This is a simplification of the previous logic. I don't *think* it'll break
anything.
Results in far fewer useless merge commmits when playing with gitweb in the
git project:
git subtree split --prefix=gitweb --annotate='(split) ' 0a8f4f0^^..f2e7330
--onto=1130ef3
...and it doesn't *seem* to eliminate anything important.
Jakub Suder