From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
To: Alex Henrie <alexhenrie24@gmail.com>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, tao@klerks.biz, newren@gmail.com,
phillip.wood123@gmail.com, Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] rebase: add a --rebase-merges=drop option
Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2023 13:42:02 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <xmqqr0ukggk5.fsf@gitster.g> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230220033224.10400-1-alexhenrie24@gmail.com> (Alex Henrie's message of "Sun, 19 Feb 2023 20:32:23 -0700")
Alex Henrie <alexhenrie24@gmail.com> writes:
> Name the new option "drop" intead of "no" or "false" to avoid confusion
This is traditionally called "flattening the history". Don't we
confuse uesrs by introducing a new phrase?
rebase-merges is about transplanting the history without flattening,
i.e. keeping the mergy commit graph topology. If there are only two
kinds of rebase (i.e. keeping the topology which is rebase-merges
and the other "flattening" kind) operation, shouldn't the option be
called "--no-rebase-merges" instead? --rebase-merges=no is also
understandable.
> in the future if --rebase-merges grows the ability to truly "rebase"
> merge commits by reusing the conflict resolution information from the
> original merge commit, and we want to add an option to ignore the
> conflict resolution information.
I am not sure why such a change "in the future" is not merely a
bugfix of the current "--rebase-merges", though. Once it is fixed,
is there a reason to make the fixed behaviour only available behind
an option?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-02-20 21:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-02-20 3:32 [PATCH 1/2] rebase: add a --rebase-merges=drop option Alex Henrie
2023-02-20 3:32 ` [PATCH 2/2] rebase: add a config option for --rebase-merges Alex Henrie
2023-02-20 9:38 ` Phillip Wood
2023-02-20 17:06 ` Alex Henrie
2023-02-20 16:41 ` Elijah Newren
2023-02-20 9:31 ` [PATCH 1/2] rebase: add a --rebase-merges=drop option Phillip Wood
2023-02-20 17:03 ` Alex Henrie
2023-02-20 21:42 ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
2023-02-21 16:08 ` Philip Oakley
2023-02-21 18:42 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-05-13 16:51 ` [PATCH 0/1] cover-letter: flatten Philip Oakley
2023-05-13 16:56 ` [PATCH 1/1] doc: Glossary, describe Flattening Philip Oakley
2023-05-15 6:59 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-05-27 16:28 ` Philip Oakley
2023-05-19 21:35 ` Kristoffer Haugsbakk
2023-05-27 16:46 ` Philip Oakley
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=xmqqr0ukggk5.fsf@gitster.g \
--to=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de \
--cc=alexhenrie24@gmail.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=newren@gmail.com \
--cc=phillip.wood123@gmail.com \
--cc=tao@klerks.biz \
/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 read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).