From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Sergey Organov Subject: Re: [PATCH] Documentation/git-rebase.txt: fix -f description to match actual git behavior. Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2014 12:53:45 +0400 Message-ID: <87ha1advqe.fsf@osv.gnss.ru> References: <87bnrq22uf.fsf@osv.gnss.ru> <87d2c22cnx.fsf@osv.gnss.ru> <87ioltik7g.fsf@osv.gnss.ru> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: git@vger.kernel.org To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon Aug 18 10:54:09 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1XJIhZ-0008Oh-R8 for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Mon, 18 Aug 2014 10:54:06 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751516AbaHRIxt (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Aug 2014 04:53:49 -0400 Received: from mail.javad.com ([54.86.164.124]:39396 "EHLO mail.javad.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751478AbaHRIxs (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Aug 2014 04:53:48 -0400 Received: from osv.gnss.ru (unknown [89.175.180.246]) by mail.javad.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 53BF660BF3; Mon, 18 Aug 2014 08:53:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from osv by osv.gnss.ru with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1XJIhF-0000Q0-LD; Mon, 18 Aug 2014 12:53:45 +0400 In-Reply-To: (Junio C. Hamano's message of "Fri, 15 Aug 2014 14:57:48 -0700") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Junio C Hamano writes: > Sergey Organov writes: > >>> A sentence "--force has no effect under --preserve-merges mode" does >>> not tell the readers very much, either and leaves them wondering if >>> it means "--preserve-merges mode always rebases every time it is >>> asked, never noticing 'ah, the history is already in a good shape >>> and there is no need to do anything further'" or "--preserve-merges >>> mode ignores --force and refuses to recreate the history if the >>> history is in the shape the mode deems is already desirable." >> >> In fact there is no way to force rebase when --preserve-merges is given. >> Neither --force nor --no-ff has any effect. >> >> Maybe some clarification could be given in --preserve-merges >> description, provided it's not clear that "has no effect" for --force >> means that one can't force the rebase in this case. > > I am not sure if that is an intended behaviour or simply a bug I think nobody actually ever needed to make it work, even though fundamentally it could have the same usage as in the case of flattening rebase. Once again, it seems that most uses of rebase handle already flat history and thus are served by vanilla invocation. > (I rarely use preserve-merges myself, so I offhand do not know for > certain). I wonder, don't you yourself use preserve-merges because you don't care and just use the default, or because you actually use vanilla history-flattening feature? -- Sergey.