From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Rast Subject: Re: git pull --rebase and losing commits Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2009 11:12:22 +0100 Message-ID: <200911031112.25064.trast@student.ethz.ch> References: <20091102151022.GA3995@atjola.homenet> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-15" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: =?iso-8859-15?q?Bj=F6rn_Steinbrink?= , Git Mailing List To: Peter Krefting X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Nov 03 11:13:33 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1N5GOG-00006p-Pg for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Tue, 03 Nov 2009 11:13:29 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756351AbZKCKNI (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Nov 2009 05:13:08 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1756198AbZKCKNH (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Nov 2009 05:13:07 -0500 Received: from gwse.ethz.ch ([129.132.178.238]:53800 "EHLO gwse.ethz.ch" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755468AbZKCKNH (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Nov 2009 05:13:07 -0500 Received: from CAS01.d.ethz.ch (129.132.178.235) by gws01.d.ethz.ch (129.132.178.238) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.2.176.0; Tue, 3 Nov 2009 11:13:09 +0100 Received: from thomas.localnet (129.132.153.233) by mail.ethz.ch (129.132.178.227) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.2.176.0; Tue, 3 Nov 2009 11:13:08 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.12.2 (Linux/2.6.27.29-0.1-default; KDE/4.3.1; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Peter Krefting wrote: > Thomas Rast: > > > Not very surprising if you use the 'ours' strategy, which doesn't merge at > > all but instead takes the 'ours' side (IIRC that's the upstream for a > > rebase, but I always have these mixed up). > > Sounds like it should be called "theirs", then. Or the documentation should > be clarify. The problem isn't that ours and theirs are swapped, it's that in a rebase, the 'ours' side is the upstream and 'theirs' is the commit you are currently rebasing. This makes sort of sense, because you are rebuilding your commit on top of the upstream (or actually, the so-far rebuilt commits, starting with the upstream), so the merge happens "on" the upstream. -- Thomas Rast trast@{inf,student}.ethz.ch