From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Rast Subject: Re: Rebasing multiple branches Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2010 15:55:26 +0100 Message-ID: <201012311555.26354.trast@student.ethz.ch> References: <4D10AE5B.2080700@gmail.com> <4D121136.6050906@gmail.com> <20101230053530.GA10511@nibiru.local> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: , , Johannes Sixt To: X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Dec 31 15:55:59 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 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PYgOb-0008Aj-AF for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Fri, 31 Dec 2010 15:55:57 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753609Ab0LaOz3 (ORCPT ); Fri, 31 Dec 2010 09:55:29 -0500 Received: from edge20.ethz.ch ([82.130.99.26]:51200 "EHLO edge20.ethz.ch" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753528Ab0LaOz3 (ORCPT ); Fri, 31 Dec 2010 09:55:29 -0500 Received: from CAS10.d.ethz.ch (172.31.38.210) by edge20.ethz.ch (82.130.99.26) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.218.12; Fri, 31 Dec 2010 15:54:54 +0100 Received: from pctrast.inf.ethz.ch (217.162.250.31) by cas10.d.ethz.ch (172.31.38.210) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.218.12; Fri, 31 Dec 2010 15:55:27 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.5 (Linux/2.6.37-rc6-desktop; KDE/4.5.4; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: <20101230053530.GA10511@nibiru.local> X-Originating-IP: [217.162.250.31] Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Please don't cull the Cc lists. Unless he's subscribed, Leonid never got your reply! Enrico Weigelt wrote: > * Leonid Podolny wrote: > > > Ah, nice. I didn't notice the -p option. However, the man page advises > > against using -p and -i together. > > Last time I checked, -i required -p ... -p internally implies -i, but the user doesn't have to know that ;-) The problem is that the todo file language is not expressive enough for what -p needs to do. Running a rebase -p without changing the todo file should behave reasonably. On the other hand, if you rearrange or extend the todo file in many cases that gives unexpected results. Hence the recommendation to not use it with -i. -- Thomas Rast trast@{inf,student}.ethz.ch