From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [PATCH] docs: Clarify what git-rebase's "--preserve-merges" does Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2015 13:55:29 -0700 Message-ID: References: <55146BF5.7040008@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Cc: Git Mailing List , Johannes Sixt To: Sebastian Schuberth X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Mar 26 21:56:07 2015 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 1YbEoY-0000wU-Bw for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Thu, 26 Mar 2015 21:55:42 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753051AbbCZUzi (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Mar 2015 16:55:38 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp1.int.icgroup.com ([208.72.237.35]:60086 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752513AbbCZUzh (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Mar 2015 16:55:37 -0400 Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A3E9A42C5C; Thu, 26 Mar 2015 16:55:31 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=V/610GmBVQMm3XU1cXvwg30GmjA=; b=f+FfZ1 VOy0LKyd6cKUD14eLd8jR+f7oDZMa4jgVzmfBqJB/JoTeeAVsqTvDbA4JzW+oZSu 53pj5DH5TCoAMyCNQA6d2eaI1g5eXp9UC19pmxyjjnAr29T1Q6rcJG/yHeuP/RNL 2ucRPz9I/bkBeHdeTOyS5/xBIeh5sWcFhCQns= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=DmtrU0uK2mkLf1CPw1J+pUA313y38vuc rMlhRYLgB8hWS5XgpYtdPmdhgJs6QiHQtSAE28KfxhkeY17gFcVh21sXNU1Ipp7o ZZTanMrKkaSHw6gk4gGSASuJ7S3zGeOsQ3do1GIFKCnOsJHNH8ybiTiLmD8wPSSa Laaivg2DDFM= Received: from pb-smtp1.int.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C84642C5B; Thu, 26 Mar 2015 16:55:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [72.14.226.9]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 256BA42C5A; Thu, 26 Mar 2015 16:55:31 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <55146BF5.7040008@gmail.com> (Sebastian Schuberth's message of "Thu, 26 Mar 2015 21:28:37 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 708EF880-D3FA-11E4-9CE4-11859F42C9D4-77302942!pb-smtp1.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Sebastian Schuberth writes: >> Instead of flattening the history by replaying each >> non-merge commit to be rebased, preserve the shape of the >> rebased history by recreating merge commits as well. >> >> or something along that line, perhaps? > > Hm, I'm not sure about the "as well" here. Non-merge commits basically > are just picked, not recreated in the same sense as merge > commits. I'll come up with another proposal. OK. I do not see qualitative difference between picking a non-merge and picking a merge; they are both being replayed and it is not like the machiery is trying to preserve an evil merge. Having said that, I do not have a strong feeling either way between keeping and dropping that "as well". I threw it in there only to contrast the preserve mode (where merges are also picked) with the normal mode (where merges are not picked).