From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jakub Narebski Subject: Re: Add --rebase option to git-pull? Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2007 18:54:42 +0200 Organization: At home Message-ID: References: <550f9510708300540u13c77201oe7cbe599c6773364@mail.gmail.com> <550f9510708300810y1ca84e8dt4d0bab8fc99deb3c@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit To: git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Aug 30 18:55:23 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1IQnIc-0003w3-Bv for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Thu, 30 Aug 2007 18:55:18 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932212AbXH3QzH (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Aug 2007 12:55:07 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932197AbXH3QzH (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Aug 2007 12:55:07 -0400 Received: from main.gmane.org ([80.91.229.2]:32963 "EHLO ciao.gmane.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932091AbXH3QzF (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Aug 2007 12:55:05 -0400 Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IQnIE-0000jH-QN for git@vger.kernel.org; Thu, 30 Aug 2007 18:54:54 +0200 Received: from host-89-229-8-65.torun.mm.pl ([89.229.8.65]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 30 Aug 2007 18:54:54 +0200 Received: from jnareb by host-89-229-8-65.torun.mm.pl with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 30 Aug 2007 18:54:54 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: host-89-229-8-65.torun.mm.pl Mail-Copies-To: Jakub Narebski User-Agent: KNode/0.10.2 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Tom Clarke wrote: > On 8/30/07, Johannes Schindelin wrote: >> In my TODO, there is "add the 'rebase' strategy". It is definitely >> something post-1.5.3, so I do not look into it. But the most logical >> place for me would be to have a strategy 'rebase'. IOW a >> git-merge-rebase.sh. > > The following is my first naive attempt, is this the kind of thing you > were thinking of? By the way, such strategy appeared some time ago on git mailing list IIRC as 'subjugate' (then renamed to 'rebase') merge strategy. As with all good ideas (stash, submodules) the idea returns... :-) -- Jakub Narebski Warsaw, Poland ShadeHawk on #git