Subversion has --record-only for merges, how do I do the same in Git ?

Posted by Paul Hammant on Stack Overflow See other posts from Stack Overflow or by Paul Hammant
Published on 2010-05-07T04:48:07Z Indexed on 2010/05/07 5:08 UTC
Read the original article Hit count: 296

Filed under:
|

I have a repo where 'master' is going in a certain direction, and a second branch 'foo' is going to be divergent for a couple of commits, then track all subsequent changes to 'master' after that. This is all by choice of course.

In Subversion you could do a --record-only merge to mark things as "merge has happened" even though no actual changes were committed. i.e. this change the merge-tracking numbers in properties attached to directories in the target branch.

I have had a play with..

git merge --no-commit master

.. as something I may be able to tinker with before I do the commit, but it is making a hell of a mess of the target branch for part of the change in question (rename followed by delete).

There must be an easier way.. ?

  • Paul

© Stack Overflow or respective owner

Related posts about git

Related posts about merge