From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Johannes Sixt Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] Make cherry-pick use rerere for conflict resolution. Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2008 09:02:05 +0200 Message-ID: <48A1356D.6020200@viscovery.net> References: <1218368935-31124-1-git-send-email-ams@toroid.org> <20080811023053.GA9144@toroid.org> <20080811104006.GH32184@machine.or.cz> <48A0274D.8090504@viscovery.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Petr Baudis , Abhijit Menon-Sen , git@vger.kernel.org, gitster@pobox.com To: Johannes Schindelin X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Aug 12 09:03:16 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1KSnuU-0004cw-Jm for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Tue, 12 Aug 2008 09:03:15 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751510AbYHLHCM (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Aug 2008 03:02:12 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751505AbYHLHCM (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Aug 2008 03:02:12 -0400 Received: from lilzmailso02.liwest.at ([212.33.55.13]:63453 "EHLO lilzmailso02.liwest.at" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751466AbYHLHCL (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Aug 2008 03:02:11 -0400 Received: from cm56-163-160.liwest.at ([86.56.163.160] helo=linz.eudaptics.com) by lilzmailso02.liwest.at with esmtpa (Exim 4.66) (envelope-from ) id 1KSntN-0000lj-S6; Tue, 12 Aug 2008 09:02:06 +0200 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (J6T.linz.viscovery [192.168.1.42]) by linz.eudaptics.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7EA3AAFCC; Tue, 12 Aug 2008 09:02:05 +0200 (CEST) User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728) In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.5 X-Spam-Score: 1.7 (+) X-Spam-Report: ALL_TRUSTED=-1.8, BAYES_99=3.5 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Johannes Schindelin schrieb: > On Mon, 11 Aug 2008, Johannes Sixt wrote: >> If the reversal is part of a topic branch that you rebase at least once, >> then you want to have the resolutions recorded, don't you? > > That is not the revert we are talking about. The revert we are talking > about is a literal "git revert ". Not a replay of a commit (that > might have been a revert originally). You are right. My example misses the point. Another example is when you have to repeat the revert, say, you find out you did it on the wrong branch. When you repeat the 'git revert' on the correct branch, you want to have the resolutions replayed. > I am a little worried that these reverts (being negative changes) could > interfer with the common operation: positive changes. Although I haven't > been able to come up with a scenario where the recorded revert would > actively be wrong in a subsequent rebase/cherry-pick. I think that your worries are not justified. A 'git revert' is not a "negative" change; it a change like any other. 'git revert' is just a short hand for a more sequence of diff+apply+commit. -- Hannes