From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: What's cooking in git.git (topics) Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2007 09:22:54 -0800 Message-ID: <7vbq9fd2mp.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> References: <200711270622.lAR6MFXQ010010@mi0.bluebottle.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: =?utf-8?B?44GX44KJ44GE44GX44Gq44Gq44GT?= , Andreas Ericsson , Jakub Narebski , git@vger.kernel.org To: Johannes Schindelin X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Nov 27 18:23:27 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 1Ix49e-0001XA-SC for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Tue, 27 Nov 2007 18:23:27 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758282AbXK0RXF convert rfc822-to-quoted-printable (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Nov 2007 12:23:05 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1758243AbXK0RXF (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Nov 2007 12:23:05 -0500 Received: from sceptre.pobox.com ([207.106.133.20]:52172 "EHLO sceptre.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756996AbXK0RXD convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Nov 2007 12:23:03 -0500 Received: from sceptre (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by sceptre.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 667172EF; Tue, 27 Nov 2007 12:23:24 -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 BD22F9A50F; Tue, 27 Nov 2007 12:23:18 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: (Johannes Schindelin's message of "Tue, 27 Nov 2007 11:12:45 +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 Tue, 27 Nov 2007, =E3=81=97=E3=82=89=E3=81=84=E3=81=97=E3=81=AA=E3= =81=AA=E3=81=93 wrote: > >> Quoting Andreas Ericsson : >>=20 >> > "git pull --rebase" already has an implementation. Dscho cooked on= e up >> > which I've been using since then. It works nicely. >>=20 >> What is the reason that the option was not added to the official git= ? =20 >> Was it coded poorly, buggy or were there some other issues? > > It is very well possible that it was coded poorly ;-) > > The main reason, I believe, was that some old-timers who know the=20 > implications said that it would encourage a wrong workflow. One thin= g=20 > that could go possibly wrong, for example, is to rebase commits that = you=20 > already published. > > So AFAICT it was deemed not only giving people rope, but making that = rope=20 > look like a necklace to them. Hmph, that is different from how I remember, and the "workflow" argumen= t would not be something I would make if we were having that discussion today. I think what happened was that we took a misguided detour to make this an option to "git merge" (which was _my_ mistake IIRC, sorry), which di= d not pan out well (because rebase is not "a different form of merge"). After that for some reason we failed to follow-up on the topic. We could have gone back to the original "a pull is integrating following a fetch, and the integration does not have to be merge" approach to see i= f it was workable, but we didn't. If people find it useful, I do not think of a huge reason to object to the inclusion. "Give them rope" is good ;-)