I am working on a project in a subversion repository with a strict check-in policy which includes: Every commit to the trunk has to be reviewed by another developer and this must be mentioned in the commit message.
While working with git-svn I am making many incremental git check-ins that aren't reviewed. Their git commit messages reflect this.
What's the best way in which to use git-svn but follow the rules for the svn repository? Should I just squash all commits into a single svn commit? Can I rewrite the commit messages for each revision with the reviewer information? Could I "manually" move each individual change to the git master branch and modify the commit message of each before doing a git-svn dcommit?
I work in a branch on git, then checkout master,
git svn rebase
and finally merge the branch into master.At this point,
git svn dcommit
will put all the interim commits into svn one at a time with their original messages — not what's wanted! But if I usegit commit --amend
to change the merge's commit message from the standard merge message to something that fits our policy for svn commits, the dcommit will lump them all together as one under the new message. Win.I've found that this doesn't seem to work if master hasn't changed over the lifetime of the branch — the commits just get fast-forwarded in, with no "merged branch" message — so it's best add the
--no-ff
flag togit merge
.Summary:
This might be worth a try, I'm a relative newbie but this is what I'm doing for now:
Create a clone of the remote svn repository:
Create a normal git repository (clone of the clone):
You can now work in the second clone as though it were a normal git repository (essentially it is):
To push your changes back to the central SVN repository go back to the first clone and:
The
--squash
parameter means that all the commits that are pulled in are merged into one commit. That commit is not committed immediately so you can then:The last step then pushes everything as one single commit.
Edit - I wouldn't normally recommend using
--squash
in other circumstances but note that the working repository retains the full complete history (it's immune to the squash) but what you send upstream is squashed into a single clean commit which is what is needed in this case. I believe it to be a reasonable compromise.You can interactively rebase your local branch against the Subversion tracking branch which provides you with an opportunity to squash and amend the commit.
Next time you dcommit, dcommit will replay your history one commit at a time and this is what will be commited to Subversion.
Assumptions:
What to do:
Your default editor will open with a list of commits in master to rebase against git-svn. You can pick, edit or squash the commit (Mix and match if desired).
After making your selection, another temporary file will open displaying commit messages for each of the commits you're rewriting. This is where you amend the commit message.
Caveats:
You're rewriting the history of your repository, exercise caution. It might be worthwhile experimenting with this behaviour until feel confident.
Yes, you can rewrite the commit messages. Yes, you can just squash them all in to a single commit. This probably depends on the review process and how much you're doing at once.
"Manually" moving each change to the master branch wouldn't be especially different from rewriting your commit messages at some level, but many diverging branches and cherry-picks could come in handy.
Overall, the answer is "it depends" and "Git is flexible enough to do just about whatever you need".