From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: tracking branch for a rebase Date: Sat, 5 Sep 2009 10:28:41 -0400 Message-ID: <20090905142841.GB15631@coredump.intra.peff.net> References: <20090904135414.GA3728@honk.padd.com> <4AA124DD.1030208@drmicha.warpmail.net> <20090904181846.GC19093@coredump.intra.peff.net> <20090904185949.GA21583@atjola.homenet> <20090905061250.GA29863@coredump.intra.peff.net> <20090905140127.GA29037@atjola.homenet> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: Michael J Gruber , Pete Wyckoff , git@vger.kernel.org To: =?utf-8?B?QmrDtnJu?= Steinbrink X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sat Sep 05 16:28:57 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1MjwG8-0007Jt-HC for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Sat, 05 Sep 2009 16:28:57 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751958AbZIEO2o convert rfc822-to-quoted-printable (ORCPT ); Sat, 5 Sep 2009 10:28:44 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751945AbZIEO2n (ORCPT ); Sat, 5 Sep 2009 10:28:43 -0400 Received: from peff.net ([208.65.91.99]:44450 "EHLO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751936AbZIEO2n (ORCPT ); Sat, 5 Sep 2009 10:28:43 -0400 Received: (qmail 27971 invoked by uid 107); 5 Sep 2009 14:28:58 -0000 Received: from coredump.intra.peff.net (HELO coredump.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.2) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.40) with (AES128-SHA encrypted) SMTP; Sat, 05 Sep 2009 10:28:58 -0400 Received: by coredump.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Sat, 05 Sep 2009 10:28:41 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090905140127.GA29037@atjola.homenet> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Sat, Sep 05, 2009 at 04:01:27PM +0200, Bj=C3=B6rn Steinbrink wrote: > > And by automating the shorthand we reduce the chance of errors. For > > example, I usually base my topic branches from origin/master. But t= he > > other day I happened to be building a new branch, jk/date, off of > > lt/approxidate, salvaged from origin/pu. I did "git rebase -i > > origin/master" and accidentally rewrote the early part of > > lt/approxidate. >=20 > Hm, I'd prefer a shorthand for "upstream for this branch", instead of > magic defaults. The more I think about, the more I think that is the right solution. Because magic defaults for "rebase -i" don't help when you want to do "gitk $UPSTREAM..". The previous discussion on the topic seems to be here: http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/113666 And apparently you and I both participated in the discussion, which I totally forgot about. Looks like the discussion ended with people liking the idea but not knowing what the specifier should look like. Maybe tightening the ref syntax a bit to allow more extensible "special" refs is a good v1.7.0 topic? I dunno. > > That wouldn't help me, because you can't "pull -i". :) >=20 > I probably shouldn't tell anyone, as it's a crude hack, but "git pull > --rebase -s -i" does the trick... *hides* OK, that's just sick. :) -Peff