On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 3:42 AM, <altufa...@mail.com> wrote: > Well, my understanding of rebase has changed since then, due to the > same problem we faced. Git 'forgets' unpublished versions when doing > rebase (but it need not - I may still be wrong here). I'm sure if > fossil implements rebase, it will not forget old versions. > > What I'm interested in is the 'feature' of rebase where it can re-apply > changes to a new a new head. The result may be in a new branch. >
You cannot change history in Fossil, except you can correct typos in check-in comments and move a check-in into a new branch. But even those changes are recorded so that you can see them in a history of the repository. The inability to rewrite history is an important and deliberate feature - not a limitation or bug. If you want nice clean changes in your main tree, you can do most of your development work in a branch (call it "experimental" for example) and then periodically merge the experimental changes into the trunk. We do that a lot on SQLite. We strive to make sure that every check-in on trunk compiles and works, and so intermediate check-ins used for sharing or as works in progress are put on branches and are not moved onto the trunk until they are ready. That way, we can "bisect" on the trunk and all our historical trunk versions will actually compile and work. And, we can look at the merge diff to see an aggregate difference for some major change. Sometimes a check-in or two will go onto the trunk (because that is default action) but then we will realize that those check-ins should have been on a development branch. This is easy to fix by changing the branch of those check-ins. Sometimes a check-in occurs that we decide later to abandon. This can be done by moving that check-in into a branch that we typically call "mistake". > > - Altu > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Eric <e...@deptj.eu> > To: fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org > Sent: Wed, Jun 23, 2010 12:27 pm > Subject: Re: [fossil-users] fossil rebase > > > > Hi,>> Is there a rebase feature in fossil that is similar to git > rebase? If> not, is it planned?>> - AltuAnd what is different > sincehttp://www.mail-archive.com/fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org/msg017 > 89.html?Eric_______________________________________________fossil-users<http://www.mail-archive.com/fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org/msg017%0A89.html?Eric_______________________________________________fossil-users> > mailing > listfossil-us...@lists.fossil-scm.orghttp://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi > -bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users > > _______________________________________________ > fossil-users mailing list > fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org > http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users > -- --------------------- D. Richard Hipp d...@sqlite.org
_______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
