git.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
To: "Kristoffer Haugsbakk" <kristofferhaugsbakk@fastmail.com>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org,
	 "Kristoffer Haugsbakk" <code@khaugsbakk.name>,
	"Christian Couder" <christian.couder@gmail.com>,
	 "Elijah Newren" <newren@gmail.com>,
	 "Siddharth Asthana" <siddharthasthana31@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] doc: replay: improvements like "mention no output on conflicts"
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2025 08:02:34 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <xmqqtsxzi7hx.fsf@gitster.g> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <753daaa4-e675-4d28-9c13-4f5ede0f3b47@app.fastmail.com> (Kristoffer Haugsbakk's message of "Tue, 09 Dec 2025 19:05:02 +0100")

"Kristoffer Haugsbakk" <kristofferhaugsbakk@fastmail.com> writes:

> On Mon, Dec 8, 2025, at 13:41, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>>>>[snip]
>>>>
>>>> All looked sensible.
>>>>
>>>> The second one looked a bit sketchy, but that was the phrase used by
>>>> the log message for c4611130 (replay: add --contained to rebase
>>>> contained branches, 2023-11-24).
>>>
>>> How should `--contained` be documented?
>>
>> The text you added uses exactly the phrase used by the log message,
>> so the author of the feature apparently felt it is good enough ;-).
>>
>> It just felt that "contained in <revision-range>" is understandable
>> enough.
>
> “is [not]” presumably.

Actually, s/It felt/I was unsure/;-).

>>     master..next?  If it is the former, is it because the topmost
>>     commit (i.e., the commit pointed at by the branch reference) is
>>     the only thing that counts, and it indeed is master..next?
>
> It’s a somewhat complex case compared to what I think is the usual one:
> a non-merge range of commits without any patch-id-equivalents on the
> target (fingers crossed). And the setup without merges: two topic
> branches in the range gives the output I expect:
>
>     git replay --contained --onto=target2 <range>
>     update <top/second>
>     update <bottom/first>
>
> I think the original phrasing is understandable. But we could add
> an example.
>
>     For example, if the range contains five commits where a branch
>     points to the newest commit and another branch points to the third
>     commit ...

Alternatively, you can explicitly refer to "the tip of the branch";
that phrasing will be understood by people from both camps.  Those
who considers that a "branch" consists of the commits between the
fork point and its tip, and those who thinks a "branch" is a fancy
name attached to one particular commit in the DAG that can move
around (typically forward).  Those branches whose tips are within
the range are updated.

  reply	other threads:[~2025-12-09 23:02 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-12-07 17:55 [PATCH 0/3] doc: replay: improvements like "mention no output on conflicts" kristofferhaugsbakk
2025-12-07 17:55 ` [PATCH 1/3] doc: replay: mention no output on conflicts kristofferhaugsbakk
2025-12-07 17:55 ` [PATCH 2/3] doc: replay: document --contained kristofferhaugsbakk
2025-12-07 17:55 ` [PATCH 3/3] doc: replay: link section using markup kristofferhaugsbakk
2025-12-07 21:58 ` [PATCH 0/3] doc: replay: improvements like "mention no output on conflicts" Junio C Hamano
2025-12-08  7:28   ` Kristoffer Haugsbakk
2025-12-08 12:41     ` Junio C Hamano
2025-12-09 18:05       ` Kristoffer Haugsbakk
2025-12-09 23:02         ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
2025-12-08 14:29     ` Toon Claes
2025-12-08 14:35       ` Kristoffer Haugsbakk
2025-12-08 16:00     ` Phillip Wood
2025-12-09 18:03       ` Kristoffer Haugsbakk
2025-12-09 22:57         ` Junio C Hamano
2025-12-10  9:51           ` Phillip Wood
2025-12-10 11:56             ` Junio C Hamano
2025-12-10 12:04               ` Kristoffer Haugsbakk
2025-12-10 14:14                 ` Phillip Wood
2025-12-10 15:40                   ` Elijah Newren
2025-12-13 13:46 ` [PATCH v2 " kristofferhaugsbakk
2025-12-13 13:46   ` [PATCH v2 1/3] doc: replay: mention no output on conflicts kristofferhaugsbakk
2025-12-13 13:46   ` [PATCH v2 2/3] replay: improve --contained and add to doc kristofferhaugsbakk
2025-12-13 13:46   ` [PATCH v2 3/3] doc: replay: link section using markup kristofferhaugsbakk
2025-12-15 10:13   ` [PATCH v2 0/3] doc: replay: improvements like "mention no output on conflicts" Phillip Wood
2025-12-15 11:59     ` Kristoffer Haugsbakk
2025-12-16  0:29       ` Junio C Hamano
2025-12-16 14:25         ` Phillip Wood
2025-12-20 19:34         ` Kristoffer Haugsbakk

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=xmqqtsxzi7hx.fsf@gitster.g \
    --to=gitster@pobox.com \
    --cc=christian.couder@gmail.com \
    --cc=code@khaugsbakk.name \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=kristofferhaugsbakk@fastmail.com \
    --cc=newren@gmail.com \
    --cc=siddharthasthana31@gmail.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).