I once had to do a git filter-branch to remove an emoji from a commit
message that broke our CI server because it was using MySQL. That was fun,
plus I had to get all my co-workers to do a git pull --rebase. So yeah,
there are occasional uses for breaking everyone's history.

On 27 March 2016 at 19:49, Al Chou <[email protected]> wrote:

> Agreed, changing the commit ancestry history of a branch that other people
> have already (even merely potentially) fetched and checked out locally is
> generally frowned upon.  Interesting to hear that anyone ever has gotten
> consensus to do so via "pull --rebase"!  On rare occasions at my job we
> have needed to "push --force" a publicly shared branch to clear up a
> problem, and we do get consensus before doing so, but no one enjoys those
> situations.
> Al
>
>     On Sunday, March 27, 2016 5:44 PM, Matt Sicker <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>
>  In general, don't use rebase on branches that other people are also using
> without first making sure everyone is willing to also rebase their own
> local copies. To do that, they can run "git pull --rebase" to update when
> you've force-pushed a rebased branch. This is generally looked down upon,
> but is sometimes necessary.
>
> On 26 March 2016 at 17:33, <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Unlike a regular merge, rebase applies a branch's commits' changes onto
> > the specified commit (which is typically identified by specifying a
> branch
> > name), in the same order as they appear in the branch that is being
> > rebased. The name of the command says that you are redefining the "base",
> > in other words, the starting point, of the branch. Depending on the
> changes
> > made by those commits, you may see what appears to be the same
> > commit/change applied more than once. See http://ProGit.org/book for
> > great explanations of this and other Git features.
> >
> > Al
> >
> > On Mar 26, 2016, 12:01 -0700, Gilles<[email protected]>,
> wrote:
> > > On Fri, 25 Mar 2016 11:56:26 -0400, Evan Ward wrote:
> > > > I'm not sure if this is the problem, but a good rule of thumb is that
> > > > if
> > > > you have pushed a commit
> > >
> > > Did I?
> > >
> > > What I wanted is
> > > * publish code ("feature-MATH-1335")
> > > * publish code ("feature-MATH-1158") that requires the new code
> > > present in "feature-MATH-1335"
> > >
> > > So I "rebase"d "feature-MATH-1158" on "feature-MATH-1335" in order
> > > to incorporate everything from there. [What "git" tells during this
> > > operation looks like the right thing to do.]
> > >
> > > By the way, I did the same with your change: I "rebase"d all my local
> > > branches on "develop" after your merged your change to that branch.
> > >
> > > What is the difference with "merge" and if "merge" should have been
> > > used, then when does one use "rebase"?
> > >
> > > Maybe I did the right thing; and it's just normal that there is an
> > > email flood in such cases...
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Gilles
> > >
> > > > you should merge it instead of rebasing it. It
> > > > looks to me like 6ddf476 and ce8c82f are the same, so I think when
> > > > you
> > > > ran rebase it put it on top of the bug fix I pushed up recently,
> > > > duplicating the commit.
> > > >
> > > > Best Regards,
> > > > Evan
> > > >
> > > > On 03/25/2016 11:34 AM, Gilles wrote:
> > > > > Hi.
> > > > >
> > > > > Last week, and just now, I've pushed local branches that handle
> > > > > the following issues (and others, either related, or set to
> > > > > "Won't fix [in current code]" in JIRA[1]):
> > > > >
> > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MATH-1335
> > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MATH-1336
> > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MATH-1337
> > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MATH-1339
> > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MATH-1158
> > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MATH-1338
> > > > >
> > > > > [I've just seen that for branch "feature-MATH-1158" which is
> > > > > "git rebase"d on "feature-MATH-1335", the push is recreating
> > > > > all the MATH-1335 commits (as guessed from the flood of emails).
> > > > > Something I was not expecting: sorry I misunderstood how this
> > > > > is supposed to work...]
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards,
> > > > > Gilles
> > > > >
> > > > > [1] See the "links" in the relevant JIRA reports.
> > >
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Matt Sicker <[email protected]>
>
>
>
>



-- 
Matt Sicker <[email protected]>

Reply via email to