All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
To: "Harald Nordgren via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@gmail.com>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org,
	 Kristoffer Haugsbakk <kristofferhaugsbakk@fastmail.com>,
	 "D. Ben Knoble" <ben.knoble@gmail.com>,
	 Phillip Wood <phillip.wood123@gmail.com>,
	 Harald Nordgren <haraldnordgren@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] branch: let --delete-merged find squash merged branches
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2026 17:30:00 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <xmqq1p9vdalz.fsf@gitster.g> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <pull.2425.v2.git.git.1791711665.gitgitgadget@gmail.com> (Harald Nordgren via GitGitGadget's message of "Sun, 11 Oct 2026 09:41:03 +0000")

"Harald Nordgren via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@gmail.com> writes:

> Branches merged on GitHub with "Squash and merge" or "Rebase and merge" are
> never deleted by git branch --delete-merged, because their tips are not
> reachable from the upstream. This treats such a branch as merged when some
> upstream commit contains all of its changes, and names that commit in the
> output:
>
> Deleted branch topic (was 1a2b3c4, landed as 9f8e7d6).

Interesting.

After rebasing, you probably can (re)use the same algorithm as used
in range-diff to match the commits and their rewritten counterparts,
but I wonder how "squash" would go.  Presumably you can locally make
a trial squash merge and probe for a similar commit on the upstream
commit.

On the other hand, unlike deliberate rebasing done during a patch
iteration, rebase done on the upstream to integrate your changes
would not rewrite the log messages, so matching the commits based on
the log message may work better than a range-diff between iteration
vN and v(N+1) in the submitted patches.

>  * Diff each upstream commit once and share the result between all branches,
>    faster than v1.
>  * Fix a branch merged with a merge commit being reported as "landed as" the
>    merge when another branch was searched first, and add a test for it. Show
>    the topic commit itself in "landed as" for work that arrived through a
>    merge.
>  * Use git merge --squash as the example in the commit message and mention
>    GitHub's squash and rebase buttons.
>  * Add --no-squashed to skip the squash search.
>
> Harald Nordgren (2):
>   branch: let --delete-merged find squash merged branches
>   branch: add --no-squashed to skip the squash search

This a bit unexpected two-patch organization; I would have expected
that the cases where our side and upstream side should correspond
one-to-one (i.e., what you call rebase-and-merge) and other cases
(i.e., squash merge) to require very different matching algorithm,
which would lead to two-patch organization where one adds support
for rebase and the other adds support for squash.


  parent reply	other threads:[~2026-10-12  0:30 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-09-29  7:30 [PATCH] branch: let --delete-merged find squash merged branches Harald Nordgren via GitGitGadget
2026-09-29  7:46 ` Kristoffer Haugsbakk
2026-09-29  7:52   ` Harald Nordgren
2026-09-29  8:08     ` Kristoffer Haugsbakk
2026-09-29 11:18       ` D. Ben Knoble
2026-09-29 13:31         ` Kristoffer Haugsbakk
2026-09-29 11:26 ` D. Ben Knoble
2026-09-29 13:44   ` Harald Nordgren
2026-09-29 13:52   ` Harald Nordgren
2026-09-29 15:28     ` D. Ben Knoble
2026-09-29 18:34       ` Harald Nordgren
2026-10-04  9:54   ` Phillip Wood
2026-10-04 22:28     ` Harald Nordgren
2026-10-08 15:25       ` Phillip Wood
2026-10-08 18:42         ` Harald Nordgren
2026-10-09  8:16           ` Kristoffer Haugsbakk
2026-10-09 11:11             ` Harald Nordgren
2026-10-09 11:18           ` Harald Nordgren
2026-10-09 13:40             ` Phillip Wood
2026-10-09 13:37           ` Phillip Wood
2026-10-09 15:27             ` Harald Nordgren
2026-10-08 17:51     ` D. Ben Knoble
2026-10-09 13:34       ` Phillip Wood
2026-10-11  9:41 ` [PATCH v2 0/2] " Harald Nordgren via GitGitGadget
2026-10-11  9:41   ` [PATCH v2 1/2] " Harald Nordgren via GitGitGadget
2026-10-11  9:41   ` [PATCH v2 2/2] branch: add --no-squashed to skip the squash search Harald Nordgren via GitGitGadget
2026-10-12  0:30   ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
2026-10-12  9:50     ` [PATCH v2 0/2] branch: let --delete-merged find squash merged branches Phillip Wood
2026-10-12 14:31       ` Harald Nordgren
2026-10-12 16:50       ` Junio C Hamano
2026-10-12 17:44         ` Harald Nordgren
2026-10-13  2:23           ` Junio C Hamano
2026-10-12 12:41     ` Harald Nordgren
2026-10-12 15:49       ` D. Ben Knoble

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=xmqq1p9vdalz.fsf@gitster.g \
    --to=gitster@pobox.com \
    --cc=ben.knoble@gmail.com \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=gitgitgadget@gmail.com \
    --cc=haraldnordgren@gmail.com \
    --cc=kristofferhaugsbakk@fastmail.com \
    --cc=phillip.wood123@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.