thanks! and a tiny comment

[Yaroslav Halchenko]

On Mon, 22 Oct 2007, martin f krafft wrote:
> also sprach Yaroslav Halchenko <lists at onerussian.com> [2007.10.22.1710 +0200]:
> > obvious possible solution imho is to simply
> > 1. reset long lasting branch to debian branch's HEAD
> After tagging the previous commit, yes. Though this isn't exactly
> pretty.
I 100% Agree on that

> I think I prefer reverting individual commits.
and why only we don't have a git feature like "git unmerge"? :-) I think
that one would be the one needed for a "neat" implementation.

Reverting commits is indeed better alternative, if it does not bring
conflicts.
Another negative side-effect that the branch would continue
officially be known as merged from the original branch supplied the
patch. Although I do not foresee any use case when we would need to
merge that branch again, it is somewhat to keep in mind (or a log ;-))

> > 2. apply all needed patches in the same order as before excluding the
> >    ones which are not needed any longer.
> This is really involved, orphans any tracking branches
indeed

> and changes the ID & dates of the commits.
heh heh -- I should try that first again before keep on talking... don't
see why IDs and dates should be changed... 

-- 
Yaroslav Halchenko
Research Assistant, Psychology Department, Rutgers-Newark
Student  Ph.D. @ CS Dept. NJIT
Office: (973) 353-5440x263 | FWD: 82823 | Fax: (973) 353-1171
        101 Warren Str, Smith Hall, Rm 4-105, Newark NJ 07102
WWW:     http://www.linkedin.com/in/yarik