From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [BUG?] "git rebase --interactive" forces me to edit message. Date: Fri, 06 Jun 2008 23:53:20 -0700 Message-ID: <7vabhxpwgv.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> References: <200806050358.m553wgK9013230@mi0.bluebottle.com> <200806062147.m56LlCOe030269@mi0.bluebottle.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: =?iso-2022-jp?B?GyRCJDckaSQkJDckSiRKJDMbKEI=?= , git@vger.kernel.org To: Johannes Schindelin X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sat Jun 07 08:54:34 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 1K4sJt-00017C-QR for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Sat, 07 Jun 2008 08:54:34 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753603AbYFGGxl (ORCPT ); Sat, 7 Jun 2008 02:53:41 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753269AbYFGGxl (ORCPT ); Sat, 7 Jun 2008 02:53:41 -0400 Received: from a-sasl-fastnet.sasl.smtp.pobox.com ([207.106.133.19]:36534 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752859AbYFGGxl (ORCPT ); Sat, 7 Jun 2008 02:53:41 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a-sasl-fastnet.sasl.smtp.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8FF781903; Sat, 7 Jun 2008 02:53:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pobox.com (ip68-225-240-77.oc.oc.cox.net [68.225.240.77]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by a-sasl-fastnet.sasl.smtp.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BB7ED1902; Sat, 7 Jun 2008 02:53:36 -0400 (EDT) User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 76359A20-345E-11DD-AE06-F9737025C2AA-77302942!a-sasl-fastnet.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Johannes Schindelin writes: >> But I started wondering (especially after read Junio's example) if you >> might have to stop and force edit the message even for commits you >> "pick", once you have a conflict. The patch might not conflict, but >> with your logic shouldn't you be given a chance to amend messages, now >> it was discovered that the upstream did change that overlaps what you >> did? > > You do. With a conflict, it stops. If you do not commit, but only > resolve the conflicts and add them to the index, then continue the rebase > -i, it will ask you to commit. Interactively. (IOW an editor is fired > up.) I might be misreading it, but my understanding of the scenario is: - you have pick A, pick B and pick C; - you reordered them to pick C, pick B and pick A; - the first one, pick C failed, and "add -u && rebase --continue" does ask for that pick C. However, if neither pick B and pick A after that step has textual conflicts, the command does not stop for them, and does not give you a chance to adjust their potentially stale commit log messages. I've already stated my position on this issue earlier in the thread.