From: "Karl Hasselström" <kha@treskal.com>
To: Jakub Narebski <jnareb@gmail.com>
Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@gmail.com>, git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: stg pull/rebase
Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2008 21:08:48 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080607190848.GA7853@diana.vm.bytemark.co.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <m3y75hw3an.fsf@localhost.localdomain>
On 2008-06-07 10:41:41 -0700, Jakub Narebski wrote:
> Karl Hasselström <kha@treskal.com> writes:
>
> > * Just one command, stg pull. stg rebase is removed.
>
> And I would have to learn to use other command (I use very
> frequently the following sequence: git remote update && stg rebase
> <branch>)? Not nice.
Right. We could keep "stg rebase" for backwards compatibility. (It
would mean stg pull --rebase.) I like to complain about the too-large
number of stg subcommands, but upset users are even less desirable ...
:-)
> I already have to use two commands: "stg refresh && stg edit" to
> make a change which affects how commit message is written, instead
> of simplier "stg refresh --edit".
Yes, sorry about that. You have pointed it out before, and I've been
meaning to fix it.
> > 2. Depending on the configuration (overridable by the
> > --fast-forward, --rebase, and --merge options), one of these
> > three things happen:
>
> Couldn't then "stg rebase" be 'internal alias' to "git pull
> --rebase"?
Absolutely.
> > * The default action is to fast-forward, which is probably what
> > most users want -- merge is very likely to do the wrong thing,
> > and rebase can lose changes.
>
> Unless you want to rebase on top of different branch, for example
> moving stack from 'master' to 'next', or when you work on top of
> branch which doesn't fast-forward, like 'pu' in git repository.
Yes, definitely. rebase would stay a "first-class citizen". But I
really do think that having fast-forward as an option is nice; in many
cases you build on top of a non-rebasing branch, and having the tool
verify that you don't lose commits is a good thing.
And when the user says just "stg pull" (having configured nothing)
it's probably best to default to the simplest and safest of the three:
fast-forward. If the user wants "rebase", it'd be available either
with the command-line option or with a (per-branch) config file
setting.
--
Karl Hasselström, kha@treskal.com
www.treskal.com/kalle
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-06-07 19:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-06-07 17:22 stg pull/rebase Karl Hasselström
2008-06-07 17:41 ` Jakub Narebski
2008-06-07 19:08 ` Karl Hasselström [this message]
2008-06-10 10:02 ` Catalin Marinas
2008-06-10 10:42 ` Karl Hasselström
2008-06-10 15:43 ` Catalin Marinas
2008-06-11 6:11 ` Karl Hasselström
2008-06-11 17:00 ` Catalin Marinas
2008-06-11 19:07 ` Karl Hasselström
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=20080607190848.GA7853@diana.vm.bytemark.co.uk \
--to=kha@treskal.com \
--cc=catalin.marinas@gmail.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=jnareb@gmail.com \
/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.