From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: martinvz Subject: Re: Difference between pull --rebase and fetch+rebase Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2010 11:41:16 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <1262979676402-4274470.post@n2.nabble.com> References: <27059158.post@talk.nabble.com> <1262889864880-4268064.post@n2.nabble.com> <1262907485376-4269422.post@n2.nabble.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE To: git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Jan 08 20:41:25 2010 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 4.50) id 1NTKi2-0005kT-O7 for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 20:41:23 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753925Ab0AHTlR convert rfc822-to-quoted-printable (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Jan 2010 14:41:17 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753888Ab0AHTlR (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Jan 2010 14:41:17 -0500 Received: from kuber.nabble.com ([216.139.236.158]:39562 "EHLO kuber.nabble.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753823Ab0AHTlR convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Jan 2010 14:41:17 -0500 Received: from jim.nabble.com ([192.168.236.80]) by kuber.nabble.com with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1NTKhw-0002Ba-DD for git@vger.kernel.org; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 11:41:16 -0800 In-Reply-To: X-Nabble-From: martinvz Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Santi B=C3=A9jar-2 wrote: >=20 > Yes, it is. The code expects that you always branch your topic > branches from the upstream branch, so all the possible fork points ar= e > in the reflog. Your flow was to create the topic from a local commit > and then push that commit. >=20 Thanks, Santi! After thinking for a while about what you said, I think = I understand. That could definitely be what I did, although I can't remem= ber for sure. Would it make sense to teach "git rebase" the same tricks as "git pull --rebase"? Santi B=C3=A9jar-2 wrote: >=20 > By the way, when Git tries to apply these two commits it should detec= t > that they are already applied so it should do nothing, isn't it? >=20 Almost - it fails, but the merge tool resolves it automatically. Martin --=20 View this message in context: http://n2.nabble.com/Difference-between-p= ull-rebase-and-fetch-rebase-tp4266164p4274470.html Sent from the git mailing list archive at Nabble.com.