From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [BUG] git-rebase fails when a commit message contains a diff Date: Thu, 08 Nov 2007 18:37:37 -0800 Message-ID: <7v1wb0xhxq.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> References: <20071109011214.GA5903@diku.dk> <7vlk98xkm3.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> <7vhcjwxk1s.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> <7v640cxitc.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Jonas Fonseca , git@vger.kernel.org To: Johannes Schindelin X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Nov 09 03:38:10 2007 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 1IqJl3-00009r-Gi for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Fri, 09 Nov 2007 03:38:09 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758716AbXKIChy (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Nov 2007 21:37:54 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751747AbXKIChy (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Nov 2007 21:37:54 -0500 Received: from sceptre.pobox.com ([207.106.133.20]:52555 "EHLO sceptre.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751435AbXKIChx (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Nov 2007 21:37:53 -0500 Received: from sceptre (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by sceptre.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 963622FA; Thu, 8 Nov 2007 21:38:14 -0500 (EST) Received: from pobox.com (ip68-225-240-77.oc.oc.cox.net [68.225.240.77]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by sceptre.sasl.smtp.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1765F92AE5; Thu, 8 Nov 2007 21:38:10 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: (Johannes Schindelin's message of "Fri, 9 Nov 2007 02:28:15 +0000 (GMT)") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Johannes Schindelin writes: > On Thu, 8 Nov 2007, Junio C Hamano wrote: > >> I wonder if this is a sensible thing to do, regardless of the issue of >> commit log message that contains anything. >> >> The patch replaces git-rebase with git-rebase--interactive. The only >> difference from the existing "git-rebase -i" is if the command is called >> without "-i" the initial "here is the to-do list. please rearrange the >> lines, modify 'pick' to 'edit' or whatever as appropriate" step is done >> without letting the user edit the list. > > Hmm. I don't know, really. I had the impression that the "git > format-patch | git am" pipeline would be faster. Heh, I did not read rebase--interactive carefully enough. Unless told to use merge with "rebase -m", rebase replays the change by extracting and applying patches, and speed comparison was about that vs merge based replaying; I thought make_patch was done in order to avoid using cherry-pick (which is based on merge-recursive) and doing patch application with three-way fallback. Apparently that is not what "interactive" does. Perhaps pick_one () could be taught to perform the 3-way fallback dance git-am plays correctly. The patch I sent to make git-rebase--interactive take over git-rebase would then become quite reasonable, I would think.