From: Petr Baudis <pasky@suse.cz>
To: Matthieu Moy <Matthieu.Moy@imag.fr>
Cc: David Jeske <jeske@willowmail.com>, git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: is rebase the same as merging every commit?
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2008 10:34:19 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080627083419.GD12567@machine.or.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <vpqfxqz5qzj.fsf@bauges.imag.fr>
On Fri, Jun 27, 2008 at 08:30:56AM +0200, Matthieu Moy wrote:
> "David Jeske" <jeske@willowmail.com> writes:
>
> > Rebasing is described in the docs I've read as turning this: (sorry for the
> > dots)
> >
> > ..........A---B---C topic
> > ........./
> > ....D---E---F---G master
> >
> > Into this:
> >
> > ...................A'--B'--C' topic
> > ................../
> > .....D---E---F---G master
> >
> > If I understand it right (and that's a BIG if), it's the same as doing a merge
> > of C into G where every individual commit in the C-line is individually
> > committed into the new C' line.
> >
> > ...........-------------A---B---C
> > ........../ / / /
> > ........./ /---A'--B'--C' topic
> > ......../ /
> > ....D---E---F---G - master
>
> I'd draw that the other way:
>
> ...........---------A---B---C
> ........../ \ \ \
> ........./ /---A'--B'--C' topic
> ......../ /
> ....D---E---F---G - master
>
> > (1) Is the above model a valid explanation?
>
> Sounds correct to me.
I don't think you can call it correct since it assumes !(2) while (2)
holds. Drawing the diagram this way is misleading; merging commits
one-by-one implies preserving the merge information in the history
graph; nothing like that is done by rebase.
Rebase is more like _cherry-picking_ all the patches on your branch on
top of the upstream branch. You just essentially take each patch (commit
message + diff to parent) growing on top of upstream's E and recommit it
on top of G.
> > (2) From the documentation diagrams, it looks like the rebased A' has only (G)
> > as a parent, not (A,G). If this is the case, why?
..snip..
> > (i.e. not connecting those nodes throws away useful information)
>
> For the use-cases where this information is useful, "rebase" is not
> for you. Indeed, in these cases, a plain "merge" is usually what you
> want.
Indeed, noone forces you into the rebase workflow for your own projects.
I personally never ever rebase (I do use StGIT though, but it records
per-patch history and makes sure I'm always in some consistent state).
--
Petr "Pasky" Baudis
The last good thing written in C++ was the Pachelbel Canon. -- J. Olson
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-06-27 8:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-06-26 23:04 is rebase the same as merging every commit? David Jeske
2008-06-27 6:30 ` Matthieu Moy
[not found] ` <willow-jeske-01l78ZaJFEDjCYTA-01l7GOyLFEDjCV8E>
2008-06-27 6:46 ` David Jeske
2008-06-27 6:46 ` David Jeske
2008-06-27 8:34 ` Petr Baudis [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2008-06-26 23:04 David Jeske
2008-06-27 0:51 ` Junio C Hamano
2008-06-27 1:08 ` Junio C Hamano
[not found] ` <willow-jeske-01l79c1jFEDjCWw6-01l7@0yvFEDjCjEl>
2008-06-27 6:24 ` David Jeske
2008-06-27 7:34 ` Matthieu Moy
[not found] ` <willow-jeske-01l79c1jFEDjCWw6-01l7HsC6FEDjCV3k>
2008-06-27 15:39 ` David Jeske
2008-06-27 15:39 ` David Jeske
2008-06-27 6:24 ` David Jeske
2008-06-27 6:31 ` Pascal Obry
2008-06-27 10:33 ` しらいしななこ
2008-06-27 21:51 ` Junio C Hamano
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=20080627083419.GD12567@machine.or.cz \
--to=pasky@suse.cz \
--cc=Matthieu.Moy@imag.fr \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=jeske@willowmail.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).