From: John Keeping <john@keeping.me.uk>
To: Ted Felix <ted@tedfelix.com>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [BUG] rebase no longer omits local commits
Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2014 23:25:02 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140703222501.GF13153@serenity.lan> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140703190917.GE13153@serenity.lan>
On Thu, Jul 03, 2014 at 08:09:17PM +0100, John Keeping wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 03, 2014 at 11:14:26AM -0400, Ted Felix wrote:
> > Starting with git 1.9.0, rebase no longer omits local commits that
> > appear in both the upstream and local branches.
>
> It is the problem that bb3f458 fixes. The change in behaviour is
> actually introduced by ad8261d (rebase: use reflog to find common base
> with upstream).
>
> In your example, I think this is working as designed. You can restore
> the previous behaviour either with `git rebase --no-fork-point` or with
> `git rebase @{u}`.
>
> The change is designed to help users recover from an upstream rebase, as
> described in the "DISCUSSION ON FORK-POINT MODE" section of
> git-merge-base(1).
Having thought about this a bit more, I think the case you've identified
is an unexpected side effect of that commit.
Perhaps we shuld do something like this (which passes the test suite):
-- >8 --
diff --git a/git-rebase.sh b/git-rebase.sh
index 06c810b..0c6c5d3 100755
--- a/git-rebase.sh
+++ b/git-rebase.sh
@@ -544,7 +544,8 @@ if test "$fork_point" = t
then
new_upstream=$(git merge-base --fork-point "$upstream_name" \
"${switch_to:-HEAD}")
- if test -n "$new_upstream"
+ if test -n "$new_upstream" &&
+ ! git merge-base --is-ancestor "$new_upstream" "$upstream_name"
then
upstream=$new_upstream
fi
-- 8< --
Since the intent of `--fork-point` is to find the best starting point
for the "$upstream...$orig_head" range, if the fork point is behind the
new location of the upstream then should we leave the upstream as it
was?
I haven't thought through this completely, but it seems like we should
be doing a check like the above, at least when we're in
"$fork_point=auto" mode.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-07-03 22:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-07-03 15:14 [BUG] rebase no longer omits local commits Ted Felix
2014-07-03 19:09 ` John Keeping
2014-07-03 22:25 ` John Keeping [this message]
2014-07-07 17:56 ` Junio C Hamano
2014-07-07 21:14 ` John Keeping
2014-07-15 19:14 ` [PATCH 1/2] rebase--am: use --cherry-pick instead of --ignore-if-in-upstream John Keeping
2014-07-15 19:14 ` [PATCH 2/2] rebase: omit patch-identical commits with --fork-point John Keeping
2014-07-15 19:48 ` Ted Felix
2014-07-15 22:06 ` Junio C Hamano
2014-07-16 19:23 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] rebase--am: use --cherry-pick instead of --ignore-if-in-upstream John Keeping
2014-07-16 19:23 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] rebase: omit patch-identical commits with --fork-point John Keeping
2014-07-16 20:26 ` Junio C Hamano
2014-07-16 21:27 ` John Keeping
2014-07-16 21:36 ` Ted Felix
2014-07-17 9:36 ` John Keeping
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=20140703222501.GF13153@serenity.lan \
--to=john@keeping.me.uk \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ted@tedfelix.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).