From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andrew Wong Subject: Re: [BUG] rebase -p loses commits Date: Mon, 16 May 2011 20:33:59 -0400 Message-ID: <4DD1C277.9070605@sohovfx.com> References: <20110516103354.GA23564@sigill.intra.peff.net> <7vfwoel6vw.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Jeff King , git@vger.kernel.org To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue May 17 02:39:42 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QM8K4-0002g0-6n for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Tue, 17 May 2011 02:39:40 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751381Ab1EQAeK (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 May 2011 20:34:10 -0400 Received: from smtp03.beanfield.com ([76.9.193.172]:59846 "EHLO smtp03.beanfield.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751235Ab1EQAeJ (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 May 2011 20:34:09 -0400 X-Spam-Status: No X-beanfield-mta03-MailScanner-From: andrew.w@sohovfx.com X-beanfield-mta03-MailScanner-SpamCheck: not spam, SpamAssassin (not cached, score=-2.9, required 6, autolearn=not spam, ALL_TRUSTED -1.00, BAYES_00 -1.90) X-beanfield-mta03-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-beanfield-mta03-MailScanner-ID: 1QM8Ef-000CoI-Fs Received: from [24.246.58.202] (helo=ZanarkandMac.local) by mta01.beanfield.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:CAMELLIA256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1QM8Ef-000CoI-Fs; Mon, 16 May 2011 20:34:05 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US; rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110414 Thunderbird/3.1.10 In-Reply-To: <7vfwoel6vw.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On 05/16/2011 04:36 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > F---* feature > / / > B---M master > > But what does it mean to rebase that on top of master, preserving merges > in the first place? You are already on top of 'master' and '*' itself > should be what you should get, no? IOW, shouldn't you already be > up-to-date? > Since preserve-merge uses the interactive-rebase, I think interactive-rebase should still pick the merge commit, which will then be consistent with what's happening if we rebase onto "F". So, without knowing whether "F" or "M" is the first-parent, I think interactive-rebase onto "F" and onto "M" should have the same effect. i.e. interactive-rebase picks the merge commit