Re: [RFC] Rebasing merges: a jorney to the ultimate solution(RoadClear)

Hi Johannes, Johannes Schindelin writes: > Hi Sergey, > [...] > In the parlance of your RFC v2, where you start with this history (which I > translated into the left-to-right notation that is used in pretty much all > of Git's own documentation about interactive

Re: [RFC] Rebasing merges: a jorney to the ultimate solution(RoadClear)

Hi Johannes, Johannes Schindelin writes: > Hi Sergey, > > On Wed, 28 Mar 2018, Sergey Organov wrote: > >> Johannes Schindelin writes: >> >> > I use rebase every day. I use the Git garden shears every week. If you >> > do not trust my

Re: [RFC] Rebasing merges: a jorney to the ultimate solution(RoadClear)

Hi Johannes, Johannes Schindelin writes: > Hi Sergey, > > On Fri, 30 Mar 2018, Sergey Organov wrote: > >> Could we please agree to stop using backward compatibility as an >> objection in the discussion of the --recreate-merges feature? > > No. > > The expectation of

Re: [RFC] Rebasing merges: a jorney to the ultimate solution(RoadClear)

Hi Sergey, On Wed, 28 Mar 2018, Sergey Organov wrote: > Johannes Schindelin writes: > > > I use rebase every day. I use the Git garden shears every week. If you > > do not trust my experience with these things, nothing will convince > > you. > > Unfortunately you

Re: [RFC] Rebasing merges: a jorney to the ultimate solution(RoadClear)

Hi Sergey, On Fri, 30 Mar 2018, Sergey Organov wrote: > Could we please agree to stop using backward compatibility as an > objection in the discussion of the --recreate-merges feature? No. The expectation of users as to what a `pick` is has not changed just because you wish it would. That is

Re: [RFC] Rebasing merges: a jorney to the ultimate solution(RoadClear)

Hi Johannes, Johannes Schindelin writes: > Hi, > > On Thu, 29 Mar 2018, Sergey Organov wrote: > >> Jacob Keller writes: >> >> > I care about the general compatibility of the rebase todo list >> > regardless of which options you enabled on the

Re: [RFC] Rebasing merges: a jorney to the ultimate solution(RoadClear)

Hi, On Thu, 29 Mar 2018, Sergey Organov wrote: > Jacob Keller writes: > > > I care about the general compatibility of the rebase todo list > > regardless of which options you enabled on the command line to > > generate it. > > It's a good thing in general, yes.

Re: [RFC] Rebasing merges: a jorney to the ultimate solution(RoadClear)

Jacob Keller writes: > On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 4:29 AM, Sergey Organov wrote: > >> Jacob Keller writes: >> >> > On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 10:57 PM, Sergey Organov >> wrote: >> >> >> >> Hi Johannes, >> >> >>

Re: [RFC] Rebasing merges: a jorney to the ultimate solution(RoadClear)

Jacob Keller writes: > On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 10:57 PM, Sergey Organov wrote: >> >> Hi Johannes, >> >> Johannes Schindelin writes: [...] > I'm pretty sure the fact has already been accepted, as he did indeed > implement

Re: [RFC] Rebasing merges: a jorney to the ultimate solution(RoadClear)

Jacob Keller writes: > On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 10:57 PM, Sergey Organov wrote: >> >> Hi Johannes, >> >> Johannes Schindelin writes: >> > Hi Sergey, >> > >> >> [...] >> >> >> >> Reusing existing concepts where possible

Re: [RFC] Rebasing merges: a jorney to the ultimate solution(RoadClear)

Hi Johannes, Johannes Schindelin writes: > Hi Sergey, > [...] >> >> Reusing existing concepts where possible doesn`t have this problem. >> > >> > Existing concepts are great. As long as they fit the requirements of >> > the new scenarios. In this case, `pick` does

Re: [RFC] Rebasing merges: a jorney to the ultimate solution(RoadClear)

Hi Johannes, Johannes Schindelin writes: > Hi Sergey, [...] > But I'll stop here. Even my account how there are conceptual differences > between the changes in merge vs non-merge commits (the non-merge commit > *introduces* changes, the merge commit *reconciles

Re: [RFC] Rebasing merges: a jorney to the ultimate solution(RoadClear)

Hi Sergey, On Tue, 27 Mar 2018, Sergey Organov wrote: > Johannes Schindelin writes: > > > On Tue, 13 Mar 2018, Igor Djordjevic wrote: > > > >> On 12/03/2018 11:46, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > >> > > >> > > Sometimes one just needs to read the manual, and I don`t

Re: [RFC] Rebasing merges: a jorney to the ultimate solution(RoadClear)

Hi Sergey, On Tue, 27 Mar 2018, Sergey Organov wrote: > Johannes Schindelin writes: > > > > On Tue, 13 Mar 2018, Igor Djordjevic wrote: > > > >> On 12/03/2018 13:56, Sergey Organov wrote: > >> > > >> > > > I agree with both of you that `pick ` is inflexible > >> > >

Re: [RFC] Rebasing merges: a jorney to the ultimate solution(RoadClear)

Hi Johannes, Johannes Schindelin writes: > Hi Buga, > > On Tue, 13 Mar 2018, Igor Djordjevic wrote: > >> On 12/03/2018 11:46, Johannes Schindelin wrote: >> > >> > > Sometimes one just needs to read the manual, and I don`t really >> > > think this is a ton

Re: [RFC] Rebasing merges: a jorney to the ultimate solution(RoadClear)

Hi Johannes, Johannes Schindelin writes: > Hi Buga, > > On Tue, 13 Mar 2018, Igor Djordjevic wrote: > >> On 12/03/2018 13:56, Sergey Organov wrote: >> > >> > > > I agree with both of you that `pick ` is inflexible >> > > > (not to say just plain wrong), but I never

Re: [RFC] Rebasing merges: a jorney to the ultimate solution(RoadClear)

Hi Sergey, On Wed, 14 Mar 2018, Sergey Organov wrote: > Igor Djordjevic writes: > > > On 07/03/2018 08:26, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > > [...] > > >> Second side note: if we can fast-forward, currently we prefer that, > >> and I think we should keep that

Re: [RFC] Rebasing merges: a jorney to the ultimate solution(RoadClear)

Hi Buga, On Tue, 13 Mar 2018, Igor Djordjevic wrote: > On 12/03/2018 11:46, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > > > > > Sometimes one just needs to read the manual, and I don`t really > > > think this is a ton complicated, but just something we didn`t really > > > have before (real merge rebasing), so

Re: [RFC] Rebasing merges: a jorney to the ultimate solution(RoadClear)

Hi Buga, On Tue, 13 Mar 2018, Igor Djordjevic wrote: > On 12/03/2018 13:56, Sergey Organov wrote: > > > > > > I agree with both of you that `pick ` is inflexible > > > > (not to say just plain wrong), but I never thought about it like > > > > that. > > > > > > > > If we are to extract further

Re: [RFC] Rebasing merges: a jorney to the ultimate solution(RoadClear)

Igor Djordjevic writes: > Hi Sergey, > > On 19/03/2018 06:44, Sergey Organov wrote: >> >> > > > > > Second side note: if we can fast-forward, currently we prefer >> > > > > > that, and I think we should keep that behavior with -R, too. >> > > > > >> > > > > I agree.

Re: [RFC] Rebasing merges: a jorney to the ultimate solution(RoadClear)

Hi Sergey, On 19/03/2018 06:44, Sergey Organov wrote: > > > > > > > Second side note: if we can fast-forward, currently we prefer > > > > > > that, and I think we should keep that behavior with -R, too. > > > > > > > > > > I agree. > > > > > > > > I'm admittedly somewhat lost in the discussion,

Re: [RFC] Rebasing merges: a jorney to the ultimate solution(RoadClear)

Igor Djordjevic writes: > On 15/03/2018 00:11, Igor Djordjevic wrote: >> >> > > > Second side note: if we can fast-forward, currently we prefer >> > > > that, and I think we should keep that behavior with -R, too. >> > > >> > > I agree. >> > >> > I'm admittedly

Re: [RFC] Rebasing merges: a jorney to the ultimate solution(RoadClear)

On 15/03/2018 00:11, Igor Djordjevic wrote: > > > > > Second side note: if we can fast-forward, currently we prefer > > > > that, and I think we should keep that behavior with -R, too. > > > > > > I agree. > > > > I'm admittedly somewhat lost in the discussion, but are you > > talking

Re: [RFC] Rebasing merges: a jorney to the ultimate solution(RoadClear)

Hi Sergey, On 15/03/2018 07:00, Sergey Organov wrote: > > > > Thinking about it I've got an idea that what we actually need is > > > --no-flatten flag that, when used alone, will just tell "git rebase" to > > > stop flattening history, and which will be implicitly imposed by > > >

Re: [RFC] Rebasing merges: a jorney to the ultimate solution(RoadClear)

Hi Buga, Igor Djordjevic writes: > On 14/03/2018 15:24, Sergey Organov wrote: [...] >> Thinking about it I've got an idea that what we actually need is >> --no-flatten flag that, when used alone, will just tell "git rebase" to >> stop flattening history, and which

Re: [RFC] Rebasing merges: a jorney to the ultimate solution(RoadClear)

On 14/03/2018 15:24, Sergey Organov wrote: > > > > Second side note: if we can fast-forward, currently we prefer that, and I > > > think we should keep that behavior with -R, too. > > > > I agree. > > I'm admittedly somewhat lost in the discussion, but are you talking > fast-forward on

Re: [RFC] Rebasing merges: a jorney to the ultimate solution(RoadClear)

Igor Djordjevic writes: > Hi Dscho, > > On 07/03/2018 08:26, Johannes Schindelin wrote: [...] >> Second side note: if we can fast-forward, currently we prefer that, and I >> think we should keep that behavior with -R, too. > > I agree. I'm admittedly somewhat lost

Re: [RFC] Rebasing merges: a jorney to the ultimate solution(RoadClear)

Hi Buga, Igor Djordjevic writes: [...] > I don`t know, I`m thinking if we are looking at todo list from > different perspectives - to you, it seems to be a sequence of > commands to create something new (yes, from something that already > exists, but that`s

Re: [RFC] Rebasing merges: a jorney to the ultimate solution(RoadClear)

Hi Dscho, On 12/03/2018 11:46, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > > > Sometimes one just needs to read the manual, and I don`t really think > > this is a ton complicated, but just something we didn`t really have > > before (real merge rebasing), so it requires a moment to grasp the > > concept. > >

Re: [RFC] Rebasing merges: a jorney to the ultimate solution(RoadClear)

On 12/03/2018 13:56, Sergey Organov wrote: > > > > I agree with both of you that `pick ` is inflexible > > > (not to say just plain wrong), but I never thought about it like that. > > > > > > If we are to extract further mentioned explicit old:new merge > > > parameter mapping to a separate

Re: [RFC] Rebasing merges: a jorney to the ultimate solution(RoadClear)

Hi Dscho, On 12/03/2018 11:37, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > > > If we are to extract further mentioned explicit old:new merge > > parameter mapping to a separate discussion point, what we`re > > eventually left with is just replacing this: > > > > merge -R -C > > > > ... with this: > > >

Re: [RFC] Rebasing merges: a jorney to the ultimate solution(RoadClear)

Hi Johannes, Johannes Schindelin writes: > Hi Buga, > > On Sun, 11 Mar 2018, Igor Djordjevic wrote: > >> I agree with both of you that `pick ` is inflexible >> (not to say just plain wrong), but I never thought about it like that. >> >> If we are to extract further

Re: [RFC] Rebasing merges: a jorney to the ultimate solution(RoadClear)

Hi Buga, I just have two thoughts to contribute as answer, so please excuse the heavily cut quoted text: On Sun, 11 Mar 2018, Igor Djordjevic wrote: > Sometimes one just needs to read the manual, and I don`t really think > this is a ton complicated, but just something we didn`t really have >

Re: [RFC] Rebasing merges: a jorney to the ultimate solution(RoadClear)

Hi Buga, On Sun, 11 Mar 2018, Igor Djordjevic wrote: > I agree with both of you that `pick ` is inflexible > (not to say just plain wrong), but I never thought about it like that. > > If we are to extract further mentioned explicit old:new merge > parameter mapping to a separate discussion

Re: [RFC] Rebasing merges: a jorney to the ultimate solution(RoadClear)

Hi Dscho, On 11/03/2018 13:11, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > > > > I did wonder about using 'pick ' for rebasing merges > > > and keeping 'merge ...' for recreating them but I'm not sure if that > > > is a good idea. It has the advantage that the user cannot specify the > > > wrong parents for

Re: [RFC] Rebasing merges: a jorney to the ultimate solution(RoadClear)

Hi Dscho, On 11/03/2018 13:08, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > > > Hmm, funny enough, `pick ` was something I though about > > originally, too, feeling that it might make more sense in terms on > > what`s really going on, but I guess I wanted it incorporated into > > `--recreate-merges` too much

Re: [RFC] Rebasing merges: a jorney to the ultimate solution(RoadClear)

Hi Dscho, On 11/03/2018 13:00, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > > > I actually like `pick` for _rebasing_ merge commits, as `pick` is > > already used for rebasing non-merge commits, too, so it feels natural. > > Phillip is right, though: this would repeat the design mistake of >

Re: [RFC] Rebasing merges: a jorney to the ultimate solution(RoadClear)

Hi Buga, On Thu, 8 Mar 2018, Igor Djordjevic wrote: > On 08/03/2018 16:16, Igor Djordjevic wrote: > > > > > Unless we reimplement the octopus merge (which works quite a bit > > > differently from the "rebase merge commit" strategy, even if it is > > > incremental, too), which has its own

Re: [RFC] Rebasing merges: a jorney to the ultimate solution(RoadClear)

Hi Jake, On Thu, 8 Mar 2018, Jacob Keller wrote: > On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 3:20 AM, Phillip Wood > wrote: > > I did wonder about using 'pick ' for rebasing merges > > and keeping 'merge ...' for recreating them but I'm not sure if that > > is a good idea. It has the

Re: [RFC] Rebasing merges: a jorney to the ultimate solution(RoadClear)

Hi Buga, On Thu, 8 Mar 2018, Igor Djordjevic wrote: > On 08/03/2018 12:20, Phillip Wood wrote: > > > > I did wonder about using 'pick ' for rebasing merges > > and keeping 'merge ...' for recreating them but I'm not sure if that > > is a good idea. It has the advantage that the user cannot

Re: [RFC] Rebasing merges: a jorney to the ultimate solution(RoadClear)

Hi Buga, On Thu, 8 Mar 2018, Igor Djordjevic wrote: > On 08/03/2018 13:16, Phillip Wood wrote: > > > > > I did wonder about using 'pick ' for rebasing merges > > > and keeping 'merge ...' for recreating them but I'm not sure if that > > > is a good idea. It has the advantage that the user

Re: [RFC] Rebasing merges: a jorney to the ultimate solution(RoadClear)

Hi Junio, On Thu, 8 Mar 2018, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Johannes Schindelin writes: > > >> If we are talking about a drastic change, a few more days may not be > >> sufficient, but we are not in a hurry, as this already sounds like a > >> 2.18 material anyway. > > > >

Re: [RFC] Rebasing merges: a jorney to the ultimate solution(RoadClear)

On 08/03/2018 16:16, Igor Djordjevic wrote: > > > Unless we reimplement the octopus merge (which works quite a bit > > differently from the "rebase merge commit" strategy, even if it is > > incremental, too), which has its own challenges: if there are merge > > conflicts before merging the last

Re: [RFC] Rebasing merges: a jorney to the ultimate solution(RoadClear)

On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 3:20 AM, Phillip Wood wrote: > On 07/03/18 07:26, Johannes Schindelin wrote: >> Hi Buga, >> >> On Tue, 6 Mar 2018, Igor Djordjevic wrote: >> >>> On 06/03/2018 19:12, Johannes Schindelin wrote: >> And I guess being consistent is pretty

Re: [RFC] Rebasing merges: a jorney to the ultimate solution(RoadClear)

On 08/03/2018 13:16, Phillip Wood wrote: > > > Side note: I wonder whether we really need to perform the additional check > > that ensures that the refers to the rewritten version of the > > original merge commit's parent. > > > > [...] > > Oops that was referring to the first side note. I

Re: [RFC] Rebasing merges: a jorney to the ultimate solution(RoadClear)

Hi Phillip and Johannes, On 08/03/2018 12:20, Phillip Wood wrote: > > I did wonder about using 'pick ' for rebasing merges and > keeping 'merge ...' for recreating them but I'm not sure if that is a > good idea. It has the advantage that the user cannot specify the wrong > parents for the merge

Re: [RFC] Rebasing merges: a jorney to the ultimate solution(RoadClear)

Hi Dscho, On 07/03/2018 08:26, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > > > So, it could be something like: > > > > merge -C deadbee 123abc:cafecafe 234bcd:bedbedbed > > I like where this is heading, too, but I do not think that we can do this > on a per-MERGE_HEAD basis. The vast majority of merge

Re: [RFC] Rebasing merges: a jorney to the ultimate solution(RoadClear)

On 08/03/18 11:20, Phillip Wood wrote: > On 07/03/18 07:26, Johannes Schindelin wrote: >> Hi Buga, >> >> On Tue, 6 Mar 2018, Igor Djordjevic wrote: >> >>> On 06/03/2018 19:12, Johannes Schindelin wrote: >> And I guess being consistent is pretty important, too - if you add new >>

Re: [RFC] Rebasing merges: a jorney to the ultimate solution(RoadClear)

On 07/03/18 07:26, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > Hi Buga, > > On Tue, 6 Mar 2018, Igor Djordjevic wrote: > >> On 06/03/2018 19:12, Johannes Schindelin wrote: >>> > And I guess being consistent is pretty important, too - if you add new > content during merge rebase, it should always show

Re: [RFC] Rebasing merges: a jorney to the ultimate solution(RoadClear)

Johannes Schindelin writes: >> If we are talking about a drastic change, a few more days may not be >> sufficient, but we are not in a hurry, as this already sounds like a >> 2.18 material anyway. > > It is not at all a drastic change. It will actually make the

Re: [RFC] Rebasing merges: a jorney to the ultimate solution(RoadClear)

Hi Junio, On Wed, 7 Mar 2018, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Johannes Schindelin writes: > > >> OK, does this mean we want to wait before merging the "recreate > >> merge" topic down to 'next'? For more than a few weeks, it has been > >> slated for 'next'. > > > > Maybe a

Re: [RFC] Rebasing merges: a jorney to the ultimate solution(RoadClear)

Johannes Schindelin writes: >> OK, does this mean we want to wait before merging the "recreate >> merge" topic down to 'next'? For more than a few weeks, it has been >> slated for 'next'. > > Maybe a few more days. > ... > I want to discuss this in the other

Re: [RFC] Rebasing merges: a jorney to the ultimate solution(RoadClear)

Hi Buga, On Tue, 6 Mar 2018, Igor Djordjevic wrote: > On 06/03/2018 19:12, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > > > > > > And I guess being consistent is pretty important, too - if you add new > > > > content during merge rebase, it should always show up in the merge, > > > > period. > > > > > > Yes,

Re: [RFC] Rebasing merges: a jorney to the ultimate solution(RoadClear)

Hi Junio, On Tue, 6 Mar 2018, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Johannes Schindelin writes: > > >> I don't think its possible to guess the semantics of the original merge > >> as users can use custom merge strategies and amend the result. It would > >> be possible to detect

Re: [RFC] Rebasing merges: a jorney to the ultimate solution(RoadClear)

Johannes Schindelin writes: >> I don't think its possible to guess the semantics of the original merge >> as users can use custom merge strategies and amend the result. It would >> be possible to detect and unamended '-s ours' merge but special casing >> that may end

Re: [RFC] Rebasing merges: a jorney to the ultimate solution(RoadClear)

On 06/03/2018 19:12, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > > > > And I guess being consistent is pretty important, too - if you add new > > > content during merge rebase, it should always show up in the merge, > > > period. > > > > Yes, that should make it easy for the user to know what to expect from >

Re: [RFC] Rebasing merges: a jorney to the ultimate solution(RoadClear)

Hi Phillip & Buga, On Tue, 6 Mar 2018, Phillip Wood wrote: > On 02/03/18 23:33, Igor Djordjevic wrote: > > > > [...] > > Otherwise, I would be interested to learn how context/semantics > > guessing could provide a better default action (without introducing > > more complexity for might not be

Re: [RFC] Rebasing merges: a jorney to the ultimate solution(RoadClear)

On 02/03/18 23:33, Igor Djordjevic wrote: > Hi Phillip, > >> On Fri, Mar 2, 2018 at 4:36 AM, Phillip Wood wrote: >>> It is interesting to think what it means to faithfully rebase a '-s ours' merge. >>> >>> I should have explained that I mean is a faithful rebase one that >>> adheres to

Re: [RFC] Rebasing merges: a jorney to the ultimate solution(RoadClear)

Hi Igor, Igor Djordjevic writes: [...] > Now, not to get misinterpreted to pick sides in "(re)create" vs > "rebase" merge commit discussion, I just think these two (should) have > a different purpose, and actually having both inside interactive rebase > is what

Re: [RFC] Rebasing merges: a jorney to the ultimate solution(RoadClear)

On 02/03/2018 19:14, Igor Djordjevic wrote: > > > > It is interesting to think what it means to faithfully rebase a '-s > > > ours' merge. In your example the rebase does not introduce any new > > > changes into branch B that it doesn't introduce to branch A. Had it > > > added a fixup to branch

Re: [RFC] Rebasing merges: a jorney to the ultimate solution(RoadClear)

Hi Phillip, > On Fri, Mar 2, 2018 at 4:36 AM, Phillip Wood wrote: > > > > > It is interesting to think what it means to faithfully rebase a '-s > > > ours' merge. > > > > I should have explained that I mean is a faithful rebase one that > > adheres to the semantics of '-s ours' (i.e. ignores

Re: [RFC] Rebasing merges: a jorney to the ultimate solution(RoadClear)

Hi Phillip, On 02/03/2018 17:00, Jacob Keller wrote: > > > It is interesting to think what it means to faithfully rebase a '-s > > ours' merge. In your example the rebase does not introduce any new > > changes into branch B that it doesn't introduce to branch A. Had it > > added a fixup to

Re: [RFC] Rebasing merges: a jorney to the ultimate solution(RoadClear)

On Fri, Mar 2, 2018 at 4:36 AM, Phillip Wood wrote: > On 02/03/18 11:17, Phillip Wood wrote: >> >> On 02/03/18 01:16, Igor Djordjevic wrote: >>> >>> Hi Sergey, >>> >>> On 01/03/2018 06:39, Sergey Organov wrote: >> (3) ---X1---o---o---o---o---o---X2 >>

Re: [RFC] Rebasing merges: a jorney to the ultimate solution(RoadClear)

On Fri, Mar 2, 2018 at 3:17 AM, Phillip Wood wrote: > > It is interesting to think what it means to faithfully rebase a '-s > ours' merge. In your example the rebase does not introduce any new > changes into branch B that it doesn't introduce to branch A. Had it >

Re: [RFC] Rebasing merges: a jorney to the ultimate solution(RoadClear)

On 02/03/18 11:17, Phillip Wood wrote: > > On 02/03/18 01:16, Igor Djordjevic wrote: >> >> Hi Sergey, >> >> On 01/03/2018 06:39, Sergey Organov wrote: >>> > (3) ---X1---o---o---o---o---o---X2 >|\ |\ >| A1---A2---A3---U1 | A1'--A2'--A3'--U1'

Re: [RFC] Rebasing merges: a jorney to the ultimate solution(RoadClear)

On 02/03/18 01:16, Igor Djordjevic wrote: > > Hi Sergey, > > On 01/03/2018 06:39, Sergey Organov wrote: >> (3) ---X1---o---o---o---o---o---X2 |\ |\ | A1---A2---A3---U1 | A1'--A2'--A3'--U1' | \ |