summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/Documentation
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
Diffstat (limited to 'Documentation')
-rw-r--r--Documentation/RelNotes-1.5.4.txt5
-rw-r--r--Documentation/config.txt8
-rw-r--r--Documentation/git-get-tar-commit-id.txt4
-rw-r--r--Documentation/git-reflog.txt15
-rw-r--r--Documentation/git-remote.txt2
-rw-r--r--Documentation/git-svn.txt6
-rw-r--r--Documentation/howto/maintain-git.txt277
-rw-r--r--Documentation/user-manual.txt81
8 files changed, 383 insertions, 15 deletions
diff --git a/Documentation/RelNotes-1.5.4.txt b/Documentation/RelNotes-1.5.4.txt
index 96ec55eb1c..a4a2a7f429 100644
--- a/Documentation/RelNotes-1.5.4.txt
+++ b/Documentation/RelNotes-1.5.4.txt
@@ -33,8 +33,9 @@ Updates since v1.5.3
too many loose objects.
* You need to explicitly set clean.requireForce to "false" to allow
- git-clean to do any damage (lack of the configuration variable
- used to mean "do not require", but we now use the safer default).
+ git-clean without -f to do any damage (lack of the configuration
+ variable used to mean "do not require", but we now use the safer
+ default).
* git-push has been rewritten in C.
diff --git a/Documentation/config.txt b/Documentation/config.txt
index 6dc9f3ed02..39d1ef5298 100644
--- a/Documentation/config.txt
+++ b/Documentation/config.txt
@@ -226,13 +226,15 @@ core.compression::
An integer -1..9, indicating a default compression level.
-1 is the zlib default. 0 means no compression,
and 1..9 are various speed/size tradeoffs, 9 being slowest.
+ If set, this provides a default to other compression variables,
+ such as 'core.loosecompression' and 'pack.compression'.
core.loosecompression::
An integer -1..9, indicating the compression level for objects that
are not in a pack file. -1 is the zlib default. 0 means no
compression, and 1..9 are various speed/size tradeoffs, 9 being
slowest. If not set, defaults to core.compression. If that is
- not set, defaults to 0 (best speed).
+ not set, defaults to 1 (best speed).
core.packedGitWindowSize::
Number of bytes of a pack file to map into memory in a
@@ -648,7 +650,9 @@ pack.compression::
in a pack file. -1 is the zlib default. 0 means no
compression, and 1..9 are various speed/size tradeoffs, 9 being
slowest. If not set, defaults to core.compression. If that is
- not set, defaults to -1.
+ not set, defaults to -1, the zlib default, which is "a default
+ compromise between speed and compression (currently equivalent
+ to level 6)."
pack.deltaCacheSize::
The maximum memory in bytes used for caching deltas in
diff --git a/Documentation/git-get-tar-commit-id.txt b/Documentation/git-get-tar-commit-id.txt
index 76316bbc9e..60d1c52f44 100644
--- a/Documentation/git-get-tar-commit-id.txt
+++ b/Documentation/git-get-tar-commit-id.txt
@@ -3,7 +3,7 @@ git-get-tar-commit-id(1)
NAME
----
-git-get-tar-commit-id - Extract commit ID from an archive created using git-tar-tree
+git-get-tar-commit-id - Extract commit ID from an archive created using git-archive
SYNOPSIS
@@ -19,7 +19,7 @@ runtime is not influenced by the size of <tarfile> very much.
If no commit ID is found, git-get-tar-commit-id quietly exists with a
return code of 1. This can happen if <tarfile> had not been created
-using git-archive or if the <treeish> parameter of git-archive had been
+using git-archive or if the first parameter of git-archive had been
a tree ID instead of a commit ID or tag.
diff --git a/Documentation/git-reflog.txt b/Documentation/git-reflog.txt
index 5c7316ceb8..25003c3866 100644
--- a/Documentation/git-reflog.txt
+++ b/Documentation/git-reflog.txt
@@ -19,7 +19,7 @@ depending on the subcommand:
git reflog expire [--dry-run] [--stale-fix] [--verbose]
[--expire=<time>] [--expire-unreachable=<time>] [--all] <refs>...
-git reflog [show] [log-options]
+git reflog [show] [log-options] [<ref>]
Reflog is a mechanism to record when the tip of branches are
updated. This command is to manage the information recorded in it.
@@ -32,9 +32,16 @@ directly by the end users -- instead, see gitlink:git-gc[1].
The subcommand "show" (which is also the default, in the absence of any
subcommands) will take all the normal log options, and show the log of
-`HEAD`, which will cover all recent actions, including branch switches.
-It is basically an alias for 'git log -g --abbrev-commit
---pretty=oneline', see gitlink:git-log[1].
+the reference provided in the command-line (or `HEAD`, by default).
+The reflog will cover all recent actions (HEAD reflog records branch switching
+as well). It is an alias for 'git log -g --abbrev-commit --pretty=oneline';
+see gitlink:git-log[1].
+
+The reflog is useful in various git commands, to specify the old value
+of a reference. For example, `HEAD@\{2\}` means "where HEAD used to be
+two moves ago", `master@\{one.week.ago\}` means "where master used to
+point to one week ago", and so on. See gitlink:git-rev-parse[1] for
+more details.
OPTIONS
diff --git a/Documentation/git-remote.txt b/Documentation/git-remote.txt
index 0da8704a25..4b263c249c 100644
--- a/Documentation/git-remote.txt
+++ b/Documentation/git-remote.txt
@@ -101,7 +101,7 @@ $ git remote
origin
$ git branch -r
origin/master
-$ git remote add linux-nfs git://linux-nfs.org/pub/nfs-2.6.git
+$ git remote add linux-nfs git://linux-nfs.org/pub/linux/nfs-2.6.git
$ git remote
linux-nfs
origin
diff --git a/Documentation/git-svn.txt b/Documentation/git-svn.txt
index 488e4b1caf..918a9928b1 100644
--- a/Documentation/git-svn.txt
+++ b/Documentation/git-svn.txt
@@ -193,6 +193,12 @@ Any other arguments are passed directly to `git log'
repository (that has been init-ed with git-svn).
The -r<revision> option is required for this.
+'info'::
+ Shows information about a file or directory similar to what
+ `svn info' provides. Does not currently support a -r/--revision
+ argument. Use the --url option to output only the value of the
+ 'URL:' field.
+
--
OPTIONS
diff --git a/Documentation/howto/maintain-git.txt b/Documentation/howto/maintain-git.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000..4357e26913
--- /dev/null
+++ b/Documentation/howto/maintain-git.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,277 @@
+From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
+Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2007 16:32:55 -0800
+Subject: Addendum to "MaintNotes"
+Abstract: Imagine that git development is racing along as usual, when our friendly
+ neighborhood maintainer is struck down by a wayward bus. Out of the
+ hordes of suckers (loyal developers), you have been tricked (chosen) to
+ step up as the new maintainer. This howto will show you "how to" do it.
+
+The maintainer's git time is spent on three activities.
+
+ - Communication (60%)
+
+ Mailing list discussions on general design, fielding user
+ questions, diagnosing bug reports; reviewing, commenting on,
+ suggesting alternatives to, and rejecting patches.
+
+ - Integration (30%)
+
+ Applying new patches from the contributors while spotting and
+ correcting minor mistakes, shuffling the integration and
+ testing branches, pushing the results out, cutting the
+ releases, and making announcements.
+
+ - Own development (10%)
+
+ Scratching my own itch and sending proposed patch series out.
+
+The policy on Integration is informally mentioned in "A Note
+from the maintainer" message, which is periodically posted to
+this mailing list after each feature release is made.
+
+The policy.
+
+ - Feature releases are numbered as vX.Y.Z and are meant to
+ contain bugfixes and enhancements in any area, including
+ functionality, performance and usability, without regression.
+
+ - Maintenance releases are numbered as vX.Y.Z.W and are meant
+ to contain only bugfixes for the corresponding vX.Y.Z feature
+ release and earlier maintenance releases vX.Y.Z.V (V < W).
+
+ - 'master' branch is used to prepare for the next feature
+ release. In other words, at some point, the tip of 'master'
+ branch is tagged with vX.Y.Z.
+
+ - 'maint' branch is used to prepare for the next maintenance
+ release. After the feature release vX.Y.Z is made, the tip
+ of 'maint' branch is set to that release, and bugfixes will
+ accumulate on the branch, and at some point, the tip of the
+ branch is tagged with vX.Y.Z.1, vX.Y.Z.2, and so on.
+
+ - 'next' branch is used to publish changes (both enhancements
+ and fixes) that (1) have worthwhile goal, (2) are in a fairly
+ good shape suitable for everyday use, (3) but have not yet
+ demonstrated to be regression free. New changes are tested
+ in 'next' before merged to 'master'.
+
+ - 'pu' branch is used to publish other proposed changes that do
+ not yet pass the criteria set for 'next'.
+
+ - The tips of 'master', 'maint' and 'next' branches will always
+ fast forward, to allow people to build their own
+ customization on top of them.
+
+ - Usually 'master' contains all of 'maint', 'next' contains all
+ of 'master' and 'pu' contains all of 'next'.
+
+ - The tip of 'master' is meant to be more stable than any
+ tagged releases, and the users are encouraged to follow it.
+
+ - The 'next' branch is where new action takes place, and the
+ users are encouraged to test it so that regressions and bugs
+ are found before new topics are merged to 'master'.
+
+
+A typical git day for the maintainer implements the above policy
+by doing the following:
+
+ - Scan mailing list and #git channel log. Respond with review
+ comments, suggestions etc. Kibitz. Collect potentially
+ usable patches from the mailing list. Patches about a single
+ topic go to one mailbox (I read my mail in Gnus, and type
+ \C-o to save/append messages in files in mbox format).
+
+ - Review the patches in the saved mailboxes. Edit proposed log
+ message for typofixes and clarifications, and add Acks
+ collected from the list. Edit patch to incorporate "Oops,
+ that should have been like this" fixes from the discussion.
+
+ - Classify the collected patches and handle 'master' and
+ 'maint' updates:
+
+ - Obviously correct fixes that pertain to the tip of 'maint'
+ are directly applied to 'maint'.
+
+ - Obviously correct fixes that pertain to the tip of 'master'
+ are directly applied to 'master'.
+
+ This step is done with "git am".
+
+ $ git checkout master ;# or "git checkout maint"
+ $ git am -3 -s mailbox
+ $ make test
+
+ - Merge downwards (maint->master):
+
+ $ git checkout master
+ $ git merge maint
+ $ make test
+
+ - Review the last issue of "What's cooking" message, review the
+ topics scheduled for merging upwards (topic->master and
+ topic->maint), and merge.
+
+ $ git checkout master ;# or "git checkout maint"
+ $ git merge ai/topic ;# or "git merge ai/maint-topic"
+ $ git log -p ORIG_HEAD.. ;# final review
+ $ git diff ORIG_HEAD.. ;# final review
+ $ make test ;# final review
+ $ git branch -d ai/topic ;# or "git branch -d ai/maint-topic"
+
+ - Merge downwards (maint->master) if needed:
+
+ $ git checkout master
+ $ git merge maint
+ $ make test
+
+ - Merge downwards (master->next) if needed:
+
+ $ git checkout next
+ $ git merge master
+ $ make test
+
+ - Handle the remaining patches:
+
+ - Anything unobvious that is applicable to 'master' (in other
+ words, does not depend on anything that is still in 'next'
+ and not in 'master') is applied to a new topic branch that
+ is forked from the tip of 'master'. This includes both
+ enhancements and unobvious fixes to 'master'. A topic
+ branch is named as ai/topic where "ai" is typically
+ author's initial and "topic" is a descriptive name of the
+ topic (in other words, "what's the series is about").
+
+ - An unobvious fix meant for 'maint' is applied to a new
+ topic branch that is forked from the tip of 'maint'. The
+ topic is named as ai/maint-topic.
+
+ - Changes that pertain to an existing topic are applied to
+ the branch, but:
+
+ - obviously correct ones are applied first;
+
+ - questionable ones are discarded or applied to near the tip;
+
+ - Replacement patches to an existing topic are accepted only
+ for commits not in 'next'.
+
+ The above except the "replacement" are all done with:
+
+ $ git am -3 -s mailbox
+
+ while patch replacement is often done by:
+
+ $ git format-patch ai/topic~$n..ai/topic ;# export existing
+
+ then replace some parts with the new patch, and reapplying:
+
+ $ git reset --hard ai/topic~$n
+ $ git am -3 -s 000*.txt
+
+ The full test suite is always run for 'maint' and 'master'
+ after patch application; for topic branches the tests are run
+ as time permits.
+
+ - Update "What's cooking" message to review the updates to
+ existing topics, newly added topics and graduated topics.
+
+ This step is helped with Meta/UWC script (where Meta/ contains
+ a checkout of the 'todo' branch).
+
+ - Merge topics to 'next'. For each branch whose tip is not
+ merged to 'next', one of three things can happen:
+
+ - The commits are all next-worthy; merge the topic to next:
+
+ $ git checkout next
+ $ git merge ai/topic ;# or "git merge ai/maint-topic"
+ $ make test
+
+ - The new parts are of mixed quality, but earlier ones are
+ next-worthy; merge the early parts to next:
+
+ $ git checkout next
+ $ git merge ai/topic~2 ;# the tip two are dubious
+ $ make test
+
+ - Nothing is next-worthy; do not do anything.
+
+ - Rebase topics that do not have any commit in next yet. This
+ step is optional but sometimes is worth doing when an old
+ series that is not in next can take advantage of low-level
+ framework change that is merged to 'master' already.
+
+ $ git rebase master ai/topic
+
+ This step is helped with Meta/git-topic.perl script to
+ identify which topic is rebaseable. There also is a
+ pre-rebase hook to make sure that topics that are already in
+ 'next' are not rebased beyond the merged commit.
+
+ - Rebuild "pu" to merge the tips of topics not in 'next'.
+
+ $ git checkout pu
+ $ git reset --hard next
+ $ git merge ai/topic ;# repeat for all remaining topics
+ $ make test
+
+ This step is helped with Meta/PU script
+
+ - Push four integration branches to a private repository at
+ k.org and run "make test" on all of them.
+
+ - Push four integration branches to /pub/scm/git/git.git at
+ k.org. This triggers its post-update hook which:
+
+ (1) runs "git pull" in $HOME/git-doc/ repository to pull
+ 'master' just pushed out;
+
+ (2) runs "make doc" in $HOME/git-doc/, install the generated
+ documentation in staging areas, which are separate
+ repositories that have html and man branches checked
+ out.
+
+ (3) runs "git commit" in the staging areas, and run "git
+ push" back to /pub/scm/git/git.git/ to update the html
+ and man branches.
+
+ (4) installs generated documentation to /pub/software/scm/git/docs/
+ to be viewed from http://www.kernel.org/
+
+ - Fetch html and man branches back from k.org, and push four
+ integration branches and the two documentation branches to
+ repo.or.cz
+
+
+Some observations to be made.
+
+ * Each topic is tested individually, and also together with
+ other topics cooking in 'next'. Until it matures, none part
+ of it is merged to 'master'.
+
+ * A topic already in 'next' can get fixes while still in
+ 'next'. Such a topic will have many merges to 'next' (in
+ other words, "git log --first-parent next" will show many
+ "Merge ai/topic to next" for the same topic.
+
+ * An unobvious fix for 'maint' is cooked in 'next' and then
+ merged to 'master' to make extra sure it is Ok and then
+ merged to 'maint'.
+
+ * Even when 'next' becomes empty (in other words, all topics
+ prove stable and are merged to 'master' and "git diff master
+ next" shows empty), it has tons of merge commits that will
+ never be in 'master'.
+
+ * In principle, "git log --first-parent master..next" should
+ show nothing but merges (in practice, there are fixup commits
+ and reverts that are not merges).
+
+ * Commits near the tip of a topic branch that are not in 'next'
+ are fair game to be discarded, replaced or rewritten.
+ Commits already merged to 'next' will not be.
+
+ * Being in the 'next' branch is not a guarantee for a topic to
+ be included in the next feature release. Being in the
+ 'master' branch typically is.
diff --git a/Documentation/user-manual.txt b/Documentation/user-manual.txt
index 518b7b5c9e..3661879f1a 100644
--- a/Documentation/user-manual.txt
+++ b/Documentation/user-manual.txt
@@ -658,16 +658,23 @@ gitlink:git-diff[1]:
$ git diff master..test
-------------------------------------------------
-Sometimes what you want instead is a set of patches:
+That will produce the diff between the tips of the two branches. If
+you'd prefer to find the diff from their common ancestor to test, you
+can use three dots instead of two:
+
+-------------------------------------------------
+$ git diff master...test
+-------------------------------------------------
+
+Sometimes what you want instead is a set of patches; for this you can
+use gitlink:git-format-patch[1]:
-------------------------------------------------
$ git format-patch master..test
-------------------------------------------------
will generate a file with a patch for each commit reachable from test
-but not from master. Note that if master also has commits which are
-not reachable from test, then the combined result of these patches
-will not be the same as the diff produced by the git-diff example.
+but not from master.
[[viewing-old-file-versions]]
Viewing old file versions
@@ -2554,6 +2561,72 @@ branches into their own work.
For true distributed development that supports proper merging,
published branches should never be rewritten.
+[[bisect-merges]]
+Why bisecting merge commits can be harder than bisecting linear history
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------
+
+The gitlink:git-bisect[1] command correctly handles history that
+includes merge commits. However, when the commit that it finds is a
+merge commit, the user may need to work harder than usual to figure out
+why that commit introduced a problem.
+
+Imagine this history:
+
+................................................
+ ---Z---o---X---...---o---A---C---D
+ \ /
+ o---o---Y---...---o---B
+................................................
+
+Suppose that on the upper line of development, the meaning of one
+of the functions that exists at Z is changed at commit X. The
+commits from Z leading to A change both the function's
+implementation and all calling sites that exist at Z, as well
+as new calling sites they add, to be consistent. There is no
+bug at A.
+
+Suppose that in the meantime on the lower line of development somebody
+adds a new calling site for that function at commit Y. The
+commits from Z leading to B all assume the old semantics of that
+function and the callers and the callee are consistent with each
+other. There is no bug at B, either.
+
+Suppose further that the two development lines merge cleanly at C,
+so no conflict resolution is required.
+
+Nevertheless, the code at C is broken, because the callers added
+on the lower line of development have not been converted to the new
+semantics introduced on the upper line of development. So if all
+you know is that D is bad, that Z is good, and that
+gitlink:git-bisect[1] identifies C as the culprit, how will you
+figure out that the problem is due to this change in semantics?
+
+When the result of a git-bisect is a non-merge commit, you should
+normally be able to discover the problem by examining just that commit.
+Developers can make this easy by breaking their changes into small
+self-contained commits. That won't help in the case above, however,
+because the problem isn't obvious from examination of any single
+commit; instead, a global view of the development is required. To
+make matters worse, the change in semantics in the problematic
+function may be just one small part of the changes in the upper
+line of development.
+
+On the other hand, if instead of merging at C you had rebased the
+history between Z to B on top of A, you would have gotten this
+linear history:
+
+................................................................
+ ---Z---o---X--...---o---A---o---o---Y*--...---o---B*--D*
+................................................................
+
+Bisecting between Z and D* would hit a single culprit commit Y*,
+and understanding why Y* was broken would probably be easier.
+
+Partly for this reason, many experienced git users, even when
+working on an otherwise merge-heavy project, keep the history
+linear by rebasing against the latest upstream version before
+publishing.
+
[[advanced-branch-management]]
Advanced branch management
==========================