From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Martin von Zweigbergk Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/31] refactor rebase Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2011 08:58:09 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: 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: Martin von Zweigbergk , Junio C Hamano , Johannes Schindelin , Johannes Sixt , Christian Couder , Thomas Rast To: git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Feb 22 14:58:21 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 1Prskv-000649-4w for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Tue, 22 Feb 2011 14:58:21 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752424Ab1BVN6R (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Feb 2011 08:58:17 -0500 Received: from mail-qy0-f181.google.com ([209.85.216.181]:40718 "EHLO mail-qy0-f181.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751693Ab1BVN6Q (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Feb 2011 08:58:16 -0500 Received: by qyg14 with SMTP id 14so1887009qyg.19 for ; Tue, 22 Feb 2011 05:58:15 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:date:from:x-x-sender:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to :message-id:references:user-agent:mime-version:content-type; bh=GSoF7Qju4/i+vYrlnsnyCTci1VlEYkAcjn/qeiF6nMU=; b=aa6u/AXxaGPNDkNhaCiMl6sIXrfahJ+kIYnEebXUTvMbe4nV8xYChdrRhUjJgJA49i HGjrN5DvDSt7CnMltW6N4IbNCwgICvYjrKRBX3bbGmtz28CCX6D2wGKVgf6lmBNRN/kk JTWWsZXInbNE7cTTKDGev0tVnq+WQoUOFkpmc= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=date:from:x-x-sender:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:message-id :references:user-agent:mime-version:content-type; b=ioOU7wpcYeUBbNK0+85zq/e1bPFtxmPSjSjUcvGaLGP7hjq/v/gKmzXvKn8KAMsf2V bYERR3JFpAQntw+GhqnR5r184HQwliTNU+XrqtZxmXKNKxh8Ede+e03adf4Rvgyk7dOI NytDYBLcipRPIrtWEmYQ7wJwT3VExXC1y1+Ws= Received: by 10.224.19.142 with SMTP id a14mr2212092qab.194.1298383095739; Tue, 22 Feb 2011 05:58:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.101] (modemcable151.183-178-173.mc.videotron.ca [173.178.183.151]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id t7sm4634094qcs.28.2011.02.22.05.58.13 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 22 Feb 2011 05:58:14 -0800 (PST) X-X-Sender: martin@debian In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (DEB 1167 2008-08-23) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Sun, 13 Feb 2011, Martin von Zweigbergk wrote: > On Fri, 11 Feb 2011, Martin von Zweigbergk wrote: > > > On Thu, 10 Feb 2011, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > > > > I am not sure if forbidding "-v --continue" adds any value; would it be > > > too much effort to allow "--continue -v" instead to achieve the same > > > degree of consistency between the two? > > > > I'll have a look at it when > > I get some time. > > 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. 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. /Martin