Jonathan Nieder <jrnie...@gmail.com> writes: > David Besen wrote: >> Jonathan Nieder wrote: > >>> This is how pull --rebase works. It turns your single-parent commits >>> into a sequence of patches on top of upstream and completely ignores >>> your merge commits. >>> >>> There is a --rebase=preserve option that makes a halfhearted attempt >>> to preserve your merges --- perhaps that would help? The >>> git-rebase(1) documentation has more details. >> >> Ah thanks, I'll RTFM better in the future. > > No, not a problem. It's very useful to see examples of where git's > behavior was counterintuitive and the documentation was more obscure > than it could have been.
Should documentaion warn that "git pull --rebase=true" (and pull.merge=true configuration) could be harmful, and that --rebase=preserve (and pull.merge=preserve) should better be used instead? Is there any scenario at all where pull --rebase=true wins over preserve? -- Sergey. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html