On Mon, Dec 09, 2013 at 12:11:50PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> John Keeping writes:
>
> > Last time this came up [1], there was some discussion about moving the
> > added block of code to affect upstreams given on the command line as
> > well as when the upstream is discovered from the config.
John Keeping writes:
> Last time this came up [1], there was some discussion about moving the
> added block of code to affect upstreams given on the command line as
> well as when the upstream is discovered from the config. Having tried
> that, it has some more fallout on the test suite than I l
On Sun, Dec 8, 2013 at 12:06 PM, John Keeping wrote:
> Commit 15a147e (rebase: use @{upstream} if no upstream specified,
> 2011-02-09) says:
>
> Make it default to 'git rebase @{upstream}'. That is also what
> 'git pull [--rebase]' defaults to, so it only makes sense that
>
Commit 15a147e (rebase: use @{upstream} if no upstream specified,
2011-02-09) says:
Make it default to 'git rebase @{upstream}'. That is also what
'git pull [--rebase]' defaults to, so it only makes sense that
'git rebase' defaults to the same thing.
but that isn't actuall
On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 10:40:22PM -0700, Martin von Zweigbergk wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 11:53 AM, John Keeping wrote:
> > Commit 15a147e (rebase: use @{upstream} if no upstream specified,
> > 2011-02-09) says:
> >
> > Make it default to 'git rebase @{upstream}'. That is also what
Martin von Zweigbergk writes:
> I think
>
> git merge-base HEAD $(git rev-list -g "$upstream_name")
>
> is roughly correct and hopefully fast enough. That can lead to too
> long a command line, so I was planning on teaching merge-base a
> --stdin option, but never got around to it.
Sorry for c
On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 4:24 AM, John Keeping wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 20, 2013 at 10:03:29PM -0700, Martin von Zweigbergk wrote:
>> On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 11:53 AM, John Keeping wrote:
>> > Commit 15a147e (rebase: use @{upstream} if no upstream specified,
>> > 2011-02-09) says:
>> >
>> > Ma
On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 11:53 AM, John Keeping wrote:
> Commit 15a147e (rebase: use @{upstream} if no upstream specified,
> 2011-02-09) says:
>
> Make it default to 'git rebase @{upstream}'. That is also what
> 'git pull [--rebase]' defaults to, so it only makes sense that
>
On Sun, Oct 20, 2013 at 10:03:29PM -0700, Martin von Zweigbergk wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 11:53 AM, John Keeping wrote:
> > Commit 15a147e (rebase: use @{upstream} if no upstream specified,
> > 2011-02-09) says:
> >
> > Make it default to 'git rebase @{upstream}'. That is also what
On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 11:53 AM, John Keeping wrote:
> Commit 15a147e (rebase: use @{upstream} if no upstream specified,
> 2011-02-09) says:
>
> Make it default to 'git rebase @{upstream}'. That is also what
> 'git pull [--rebase]' defaults to, so it only makes sense that
>
On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 12:24:13PM -0700, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> John Keeping wrote:
>
> >Since commit d44e712 (pull: support
> > rebased upstream + fetch + pull --rebase, 2009-07-19), pull has actually
> > chosen the most recent reflog entry which is an ances
Hi,
John Keeping wrote:
>Since commit d44e712 (pull: support
> rebased upstream + fetch + pull --rebase, 2009-07-19), pull has actually
> chosen the most recent reflog entry which is an ancestor of the current
> branch if it can find one.
>
> Change rebase so t
Commit 15a147e (rebase: use @{upstream} if no upstream specified,
2011-02-09) says:
Make it default to 'git rebase @{upstream}'. That is also what
'git pull [--rebase]' defaults to, so it only makes sense that
'git rebase' defaults to the same thing.
but that isn't actuall
13 matches
Mail list logo
