Re: [SCRIPT/RFC 0/3] git-commit --onto-parent (three-way merge,noworking tree file changes)

[Alexei Lozovsky <a.lozovsky@gmail.com>]

On Dec 11, 2017, at 01:17, Igor Djordjevic wrote:
> On 10/12/2017 13:22, Phillip Wood wrote:
>> I understood Alexei to mean that it was merging the f!A into A that 
>> caused conflicts due to the fact that f!A has conflicting context
>> that was introduced in B. After all B' the rebased B is merge A A' B
>> whether it is created by 'rebase --autosquash' or 'rebase --onto'. A'
>> must be the same in both cases or one is applying a different fix.
> 
> Yes, I understand and agree you might be right, what you are talking 
> about being what he actually _meant_, but because that is not what he 
> _wrote_, I wanted to see an example of it, (still?) hoping that he 
> really did mean what he wrote (commit B being the problematic one), 
> as then there would be a possibility for improvement.

I'm not really good at remembering the exact details, so if you ask
for a testimony then I'm not sure whether it's the conflicts in the
fixups or the later commits that I was annoyed by :) I'm also not
really versed in the technical details of rebasing, so I cannot give
an educated guess on which one is more likely to cause conflicts.

> Still, I hope for that example...! :D

I keep this thread pinned, so I hope to provide a more concrete example
as soon as I encounter the conflicting situation again in the wild. I'm
not sure that I am able to construct a relevant example artificially.