From: Jakub Narebski <jnareb@gmail.com>
To: Stephan Beyer <s-beyer@gmx.net>
Cc: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>,
git@vger.kernel.org, Christian Couder <chriscool@tuxfamily.org>,
Daniel Barkalow <barkalow@iabervon.org>
Subject: Re: [GSoC] What is status of Git's Google Summer of Code 2008 projects?
Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2008 18:12:14 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200807081812.15651.jnareb@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080708144239.GJ6726@leksak.fem-net>
Stephan Beyer wrote:
> Jakub Narebski wrote:
>>> Yes, you are right that am --rebasing is a no-op.
>>> That option was a little mystery to me, because it seemed to do nothing
>>> special, but I'll check again (bash-completion etc) and do appropriate
>>> changes.
>>
>> Undocumented option '--rebasing' to git-am is internal option changing
>> git-am behavior to be better used by git-rebase, namely it does not
>> change commit message even if it doesn't follow git commit message
>> convention,
>
> Ah yes, I've seen it now.
>
> It is taking the commit message from the commit in the "From <commit> .*"
> line, does *not* change it in any way and then applies the changes using
> threeway merge.
Not exactly. "git am --rebasing" still tries to first just *apply*
the patch, then (I think) it falls back on blob-id based 3way merge.
> Keeping that in mind what about dealing with --rebasing like that:
> if --rebasing is given, git am simply generates
> pick <commit>
> lines, instead of
> patch -3 -k <msg>
> as it is now (and this is not enough, as it seems).
It is not.
Nevertheless it would be I think better for ordinary patch based rebase
to fall back not on git-am 3way merge, but on cherry-pick based merge
(i.e. on pick).
> The alternative for doing "pick" is teaching git-sequencer's "patch"
> insn an option that emulates the --rebasing behavior.
>
> For me this feels somehow unclean. But perhaps there are good reasons.
Why unclean?
But I agree that it would be nice to simplify '--rebasing' logic, for
example using patch or 2way merge to generate tree, and commit message
taken directly from commit, not via 'format-patch | am' pipeline.
> Of course, somehow I think that rebase and rebase-i should be merged,
> calling sequencer directly, with the main difference that -i will
> invoke an editor to allow editing of the TODO file.
> But nobody is hurt, if I put such a change far far away.
rebase-m and rebase-i can be merged; ordinary rebase uses other
mechanism: git-am pipeline, and not cherry-picking.
--
Jakub Narebski
Poland
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-07-08 16:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 46+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-07-08 0:27 [GSoC] What is status of Git's Google Summer of Code 2008 projects? Jakub Narebski
2008-07-08 0:43 ` David Symonds
2008-07-08 1:00 ` Stephan Beyer
2008-07-08 1:14 ` Junio C Hamano
2008-07-08 1:47 ` Stephan Beyer
2008-07-08 7:39 ` Jakub Narebski
2008-07-08 14:42 ` Stephan Beyer
2008-07-08 16:12 ` Jakub Narebski [this message]
2008-07-08 16:34 ` Stephan Beyer
2008-07-08 17:31 ` Jakub Narebski
2008-07-08 4:08 ` Lea Wiemann
2008-07-08 7:20 ` J.H.
2008-07-08 4:19 ` Shawn O. Pearce
2008-07-08 16:31 ` Joshua Roys
2008-07-08 16:45 ` Johannes Schindelin
2008-07-08 17:22 ` Jakub Narebski
2008-07-08 17:00 ` Petr Baudis
2008-07-08 21:24 ` Sam Vilain
2008-07-09 10:18 ` Sverre Rabbelier
2008-07-09 10:56 ` Miklos Vajna
2008-07-09 11:36 ` Jakub Narebski
2008-07-20 22:29 ` Jakub Narebski
2008-07-20 22:43 ` Sverre Rabbelier
2008-07-20 22:57 ` Stephan Beyer
2008-07-21 0:55 ` Sam Vilain
2008-07-21 1:05 ` Johannes Schindelin
2008-07-21 10:23 ` Jakub Narebski
2008-07-21 10:40 ` Petr Baudis
2008-07-21 13:23 ` Joshua Roys
2008-07-21 3:22 ` Shawn O. Pearce
2008-08-17 5:26 ` Sverre Rabbelier
2008-08-14 2:57 ` Jakub Narebski
2008-08-14 12:42 ` Sam Vilain
2008-08-14 23:17 ` Petr Baudis
2008-08-14 23:23 ` Jakub Narebski
2008-08-14 23:04 ` Johannes Schindelin
2008-08-15 19:38 ` Lea Wiemann
2008-08-15 20:36 ` Jakub Narebski
2008-08-16 1:16 ` Stephan Beyer
2008-08-16 1:22 ` Shawn O. Pearce
2008-08-16 3:10 ` Jakub Narebski
2008-08-17 20:49 ` Marek Zawirski
2008-08-18 5:51 ` Shawn O. Pearce
2008-08-19 1:25 ` Joshua Roys
2008-08-20 6:19 ` Sam Vilain
2008-08-22 23:03 ` Stephan Beyer
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=200807081812.15651.jnareb@gmail.com \
--to=jnareb@gmail.com \
--cc=barkalow@iabervon.org \
--cc=chriscool@tuxfamily.org \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=s-beyer@gmx.net \
/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).