Re: [RFC] git-brebase

[Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com>]

On Sat, Oct 03, 2026 at 11:07:04PM +0200, Alejandro Colomar wrote:
> Since --abort doesn't go all the way back, I think --continue shouldn't
> continue all the way forward, for consistency.

Fair.

> If that's desired behavior, it should go in this tool, and not as part
> of git-rebase(1).  git-rebase(1) is a much simpler and much more
> fundamental tool, which is used to build this more complex tool.
> That's one reason I'm rather opposed to having this as part of
> git-rebase(1); it would confuse about the responsibility of
> git-rebase(1).  IMO, git-rebase(1) is a plumbing command, and
> git-brebase would be a porcelain thingy.
> 
> > If we take this approach then we'd need an option not to enable this
> > behavior but to disable it, something like `--direct`.
> 
> That hints it might be just be a different command.

If this was 2007, and you were writing the first version of `rebase`,
and you had already worked out that you wanted this feature, what would
you do then?  Would you make it the default?  I _think_ I would.

Basically, this makes rebasing much nicer, so why not make it the
default?

Nico
--