All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Shawn Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
To: Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: git pull for update of netdev fails.
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2006 17:40:01 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20060920214001.GD24415@spearce.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.63.0609202325510.19042@wbgn013.biozentrum.uni-wuerzburg.de>

Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Sep 2006, Shawn Pearce wrote:
> 
> > Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> wrote:
> > > Another, even more serious problems with rebasing: You can introduce a bug 
> > > by rebasing. Meaning: git-rebase can succeed, even compilation is fine, 
> > > but the sum of your patches, and the patches you are rebasing on, is 
> > > buggy. And there is _no_ way to bisect this, since the "good" version can 
> > > be gone for good.
> > 
> > True, however one would hope that you tested the commit before you
> > rebased it and found it to working.  And bisect should point at the
> > new version of that commit as the break.  And then you can debug
> > it there.
> 
> You misunderstood me. You can _introduce_ a bug by rebasing. _After_ 
> testing that everything is fine. You can even test the rebased branch and 
> miss the bug, since your original tests were more thorough.

Why were your original tests more thorough and your rebased testing
was less so?  Hmm?  Perhaps the test suite needs to be extended as
part of the rebased commit(s).

Of course a rebase-introduced bug could also be in the test suite,
such that you miss the true bug.  I've had bugs in the test suite
mask real bug, but never a bug both in the feature and in the test
due to a rebase or mad merge.  I guess I've just been lucky there.


When rebasing and even when doing a non-fast forward merge one
needs to keep in mind that your code is being edited on your behalf.
Not much different then if you open it in your favorite editor and
whack away at a keyboard for a while.  Sure these auto-edits work
most of the time, on their own and without user intervention, but
every once in while things get messed up.  Heck, I've seen editors
mess up source files such that they won't compile anymore.

So moral of the story is you probably should be testing even after
rebasing or cherry picking, and the testing shouldn't be any less
extensive than before you did the rebase/cherry-pick.  Which is one
reason why automated test suites can be useful, despite the risks
they also bring...

-- 
Shawn.

  reply	other threads:[~2006-09-20 21:40 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 43+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2006-09-20 15:03 git pull for update of netdev fails Stephen Hemminger
2006-09-20 15:28 ` Linus Torvalds
2006-09-20 15:54   ` Petr Baudis
2006-09-20 16:02     ` Johannes Schindelin
2006-09-20 16:07       ` Petr Baudis
2006-09-20 16:19         ` Linus Torvalds
2006-09-20 16:26           ` Linus Torvalds
2006-09-20 16:34             ` Shawn Pearce
2006-09-20 16:49               ` Linus Torvalds
2006-09-20 17:10                 ` Shawn Pearce
2006-09-20 21:23               ` Johannes Schindelin
2006-09-20 21:27                 ` Shawn Pearce
2006-09-20 21:37                   ` Johannes Schindelin
2006-09-20 21:42                     ` Junio C Hamano
2006-09-20 21:53                       ` Johannes Schindelin
2006-09-20 21:53                       ` Shawn Pearce
2006-09-20 21:49                     ` Shawn Pearce
2006-09-23  4:18             ` Petr Baudis
2006-09-20 16:28           ` Shawn Pearce
2006-09-20 16:38             ` Linus Torvalds
2006-09-20 21:14           ` Johannes Schindelin
2006-09-20 21:21             ` Shawn Pearce
2006-09-20 21:27               ` Johannes Schindelin
2006-09-20 21:40                 ` Shawn Pearce [this message]
2006-09-20 22:34             ` Jakub Narebski
2006-09-23  3:44             ` Petr Baudis
2006-09-23  4:00               ` Shawn Pearce
2006-09-23  4:09                 ` Petr Baudis
2006-09-23 13:15                   ` Catalin Marinas
2006-09-23 13:10               ` Catalin Marinas
2006-09-24 20:54                 ` Petr Baudis
2006-09-25 12:47                   ` Catalin Marinas
2006-09-20 16:05     ` Junio C Hamano
2006-09-20 16:18       ` Petr Baudis
2006-09-20 16:33         ` Linus Torvalds
2006-09-20 20:01         ` Jakub Narebski
2006-09-20 16:15     ` Linus Torvalds
2006-09-20 16:59       ` Shawn Pearce
2006-09-20 17:34         ` Linus Torvalds
2006-09-20 23:12         ` Krzysztof Halasa
2006-09-20 19:58     ` Jakub Narebski
2006-09-21  9:14       ` Johannes Schindelin
2006-09-20 19:24   ` Jeff Garzik

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20060920214001.GD24415@spearce.org \
    --to=spearce@spearce.org \
    --cc=Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.