On Thu, 2 Oct 2014, Jed Brown wrote:

Satish Balay <[email protected]> writes:

...

...

Ok, if this can be documented and made as simple as possible? A tool to do it? If it requires remember several arcane git commands to do and remember the numbers of 5 merges you made, then forget it.

Perhaps Jed will reply with a simpler 'single' command to do the revert all the merges from the feature branch - and an easy way to verify.

Nope, but I don't recommend these reverts because it makes it more confusing to follow 'next' and to find which commit introduced a change (when debugging something in 'next'). My preference is that in normal workflow, you don't rebase/modify that which has been merged to 'next'. If it's catastrophically wrong, then revert on 'next' and start over, but if it just needs a tweak, do that on top of your branch.

I think is ok to be a bit more messy in next. Sure there is a tradeoff - but you get better debugging in master :) We shouldn't be doing rebase for every feature branch (thats merged to next) - but for the very few that might need it - we should ok to do it. And it should be done only when the feature is deemed *complete* [say 1-2 weeks of cooking in next - without a need for updates] Satish