cherry-pick

I ran into a situation where git cherry-pick X would have some conflicts, but also created extra inserts (when verified with git diff ). I then re-ran git show X > my.patch , and then did patch -p1 < my.patch on my tree. I got better results, some conflicts, but a much cleaner result. What does git does special with cherry-picks? I use git 1.7.0.4. Edited: By cleaner results, I mean the resulting tree matched a lot more the results of git show X , whereas the git cherry-pick included a lot more code. When you cherry-pick a commit, it commits the result using all the metadata of the commit, not

$ git cherry-pick 5de83068 error: Your local changes to the following files would be overwritten by merge: Components/ApplicationEnums/Application.cs Please, commit your changes or stash them before you can merge. Aborting $ git status # On branch master nothing to commit (working directory clean) UPDATE Sorry, I switched to another branch, and switched back again, and can't reproduce this anymore :( I'm not quite sure whats the problem but you can reset your working copy with the follwing statement: git reset --hard origin/master I had this issue. Error was - error: Your local changes would

I'm about to merge certain revisions from trunk into a release-branch. I've checked with mergeinfo how many revisions are eligible to get merged, and that were 42. Although it's definitely possible and not too hard to check each revision log and decide whether it should be merged or not. I would then check the logs with TortoiseSVN and use the command line svn merge -c rev1,rev2 function or -r for ranges of course. I was wondering if TortoiseSVN has a tool to make this cherrypicking a lot easier. I've googled for it, but found out that only probably TortoiseGit has it. Any other methods which

Let's imagine that we have a master branch. Then we create a newbranch git checkout -b newbranch and make two new commits to newbranch : commit1 and commit2 Then we switch to master and make cherry-pick git checkout master git cherry-pick hash_of_commit1 Looking into gitk we see that commit1 and its cherry-picked version have different hashes, so technically they are two different commits. Finally we merge newbranch into master : git merge newbranch and see that these two commits with different hashes were merged without problems although they imply that the same changes should be applied

We have two heads. One is our main development head and the other is one that I forgot about until today. We found a bug and fixed it in our main development branch, and I just realized it should be fixed in the older branch as well. I think it would have been better to make the change on the older branch and merge that with the up-to-date branch, but we didn't do it that way. Can mercurial handle this? We haven't tried to do anything like this and I can't really wrap my head around how it would be done. Martin Geisler Yes, you have two good options: Graft: new in Mercurial 2.0 This version

In Git, cherry-pick retains the original commit's author, timestamp etc, at least when there are no conflicts. But is there any way to determine what user performed the cherry-pick which brought that commit to the new branch? The author will be picked up from the original commit, but the committer (shown with git log --format=full ) will be the one doing the cherry picking. This committer field is not secure, as cherry-pick commit creation is ultimately under the control of the cherry-picker. The only reliable way to track the commit creator, in this case the cherry pick instigator, is by

The following is a scenario I commonly face: You have a set of commits on master or design , that I want to put on top of production branch. I tend to create a new branch with the base as production cherry-pick these commits on it and merge it to production Then when I merge master to production, I face merge conflicts because even tho the changes are same, but are registered as a different commit because of cherry-pick. I have found some workarounds to deal with this, all of which are laborious and can be termed "hacks". Altho' I haven't done too much rebasing, I believe that too creates a

Yesterday I cherry-picked two commits into my main branch, one of them caused merge conflicts and I resolved them, committed and pushed them to origin. Today I am attempting to pull from the server when I get the following error: $ git pull fatal: You have not concluded your cherry-pick (CHERRY_PICK_HEAD exists). Please, commit your changes before you can merge. $ Git status reads: $ git status # On branch main # Your branch is behind 'origin/main' by 2 commits, and can be fast-forwarded. # $ I have tried the following to no avail: $ git cherry-pick --continue usage: git cherry-pick [options]