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