> On Sat, Jul 04, 2020 at 02:31:34PM +0530, Faheem Mitha wrote: > Yes, of curse. Here is my test case:
> --8<--
> hg init topic-merge-rebase
> cd topic-merge-rebase
> # since the rebase is not complete we have to re-run rebase with
> # an additional (but unneeded) parameter
> hg rebase -r "topic(feature)"
> hg log -GT "{rev}: {desc}"
What I am saying is not helpful. In the situation you present a merge
would be, for me, the best alternative since it precisely describes what
happened, however, you linearize (as many people using git) the history.
What is the benefit from this approach??
I am just curious, because I want it precisely the other way around.
1. Git offers fast-forward merge (linear history)
2. And not fast forward merge (which I prefer)
Mercurial has no fast-forward merge for named branches but, still, not
for topics. I am not going to describe this here in details, because it
is off-topic.
I am just curious.
Regards
Uwe Brauer
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ Evolve-testers mailing list [email protected] https://www.mercurial-scm.org/mailman/listinfo/evolve-testers
