From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/31] refactor rebase Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2011 11:21:42 -0800 Message-ID: <7vd3mjdge1.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> References: <1293528648-21873-1-git-send-email-martin.von.zweigbergk@gmail.com> <1297017841-20678-1-git-send-email-martin.von.zweigbergk@gmail.com> <7vd3mz33xb.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Johannes Schindelin , Johannes Sixt , Christian Couder , Thomas Rast To: Martin von Zweigbergk X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Feb 22 20:22:09 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PrxoG-0003Ck-Kh for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Tue, 22 Feb 2011 20:22:09 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755111Ab1BVTWD (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Feb 2011 14:22:03 -0500 Received: from a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com ([64.74.157.62]:49780 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755026Ab1BVTWC (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Feb 2011 14:22:02 -0500 Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A43732E1; Tue, 22 Feb 2011 14:23:10 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=to:cc:subject :references:from:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=ed7DwSvW6Y3rvCqSuJth/pK4V/Q=; b=kwW03q OvbycDmWSPxQElobxWWhfzWlCvwmkvyQUrciaASarJOYVAomaY22vP+kFOJw0xwd gE8l4c9v2+2DHLg5WWVKpBDClVvAmacxBb8+BmMqqg1ZsAYdi2heYRExaD89IiLT r1AxrIYxynJv1RKocYj8lqcaJZLnZxllWKQuU= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=to:cc:subject :references:from:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=JmT8RB7cMnnVmJ9zOJDFECcN4k4v2Rnt wLIWCzxbL6eSPuMe9N8k1qMJEwsDS1GyBsyukJ1KlAdWTcDb/oavOBT7DE3ynQ76 fmzA1sKrSYulMlujqNdVLf1Y0vArJqxq2VJd++jkuI/4n8hWuj6LJ58yM6ZatU01 1UqNLWdhc8w= Received: from a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 271B632E0; Tue, 22 Feb 2011 14:23:04 -0500 (EST) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [76.102.170.102]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3DEE332CC; Tue, 22 Feb 2011 14:22:54 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: (Martin von Zweigbergk's message of "Tue\, 22 Feb 2011 08\:58\:09 -0500 \(EST\)") User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.2 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 2B846D4A-3EB9-11E0-8582-AF401E47CF6F-77302942!a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Martin von Zweigbergk writes: > On Sun, 13 Feb 2011, Martin von Zweigbergk wrote: > ... >> This would apply on top of mz/rebase after dropping 95135b0 (rebase: >> stricter check of standalone sub command, 2011-02-06). If you agree >> with it, I will include it in a future re-roll. > > Any opinions about this, anyone? I have one example: I was rebasing > some things the other day where I thought there would be no conflicts. > After applying a number of patches, it turned out there were > conflicts. I think allowing 'git rebase --continue -sours' would have > been useful in that case. It's rare enough that I don't care much, > though. Hmm, do you think applying -sours throughout to the rest of the series would have been a safe thing, or do you think you would rather wanted to see -sours applied only to that particular one? > The reason I'm asking is that I have a patch that fixes the problems > with the command line parsing that Johannes Sixt pointed out in > another mail on this thread and would like to know if I should make it > apply on top of this patch or not. It is a good idea to build a change you are more certain of first, excluding the ones you have doubts about. Besides, this part of the patch would need fixing anyway ;-) @@ -288,6 +314,7 @@ test $# -gt 2 && usage if test -n "$action" then + test -n "$resume_incompatible" && "--$action used with incompatible option" test -z "$in_progress" && die "No rebase in progress?" # Only interactive rebase uses detailed reflog messages if test "$type" = interactive && test "$GIT_REFLOG_ACTION" = rebase