From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.9 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_PASS, SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 131411F5AE for ; Wed, 15 Jul 2020 03:20:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728410AbgGODUT (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Jul 2020 23:20:19 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:32866 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725977AbgGODUS (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Jul 2020 23:20:18 -0400 Received: from mail-qt1-x843.google.com (mail-qt1-x843.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::843]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DAEE0C061755 for ; Tue, 14 Jul 2020 20:20:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qt1-x843.google.com with SMTP id b25so651514qto.2 for ; Tue, 14 Jul 2020 20:20:17 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=HBvkXETgPD7NvoTk+7Y1sdVzZQZJhyfLs8DyuWkunOM=; b=DAFxHHk+VYR9WgS+5zsqO1sWnyIPVbUlQMfRljyMVgYEwT5BVoKsEJTZwbDey0JNm1 UXo19m8GbjFR2WIJOKIIM2w/phj8giXOzpkEl22wzGDzob6kJOH/wtDOoFDWRF3OPxiD +C6MItbJQmqYDN3pt+pXe+sErxa9qP41jsSzyPjD/ixXjwNNqpnXOq7Hxs6lRPLKc2Cl N1FwP9cnUmrf/QYMHjqZj/r4td4Xb+9IfFcs46mu335m/zhx3K46xPeLmE3DDJWJdnUN l5BpeVvp5YsGPV/k4oFOjCcGvEtZdkS5oNE43Rdo1u5UNbvzIwNDaHhw0nknVrCquqvj 3zzw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=HBvkXETgPD7NvoTk+7Y1sdVzZQZJhyfLs8DyuWkunOM=; b=Ozy7tloMq/K2NxditEF0xZxlI5C59TyssKvi/yuabO5GKpsP4HKGfPIGg6QyiisLBS DQuMsHoiHfFIc30q8ehmKcdBrAZDj7ThsC1KR7QTX6bM5Gmerwm7+1+ph/ylBfjednQM K6Fx/jbCrPEAFT9K7QVI6KDTtnzjktawLgWYKWJpGQKwwjCpvhY3P8DPg4AqIje64nJd C3etfWYnmG1eApO+AvDEP2n+fSkPH2TDlanS/6TdK+XG90fElJzWDPUAlbBfVHANV6GN tAzjW6A2pm9ZW+KfOz9j+iwhgxaIoxfq11yadKJUunhzNsoY3INhVz4fiv7vOE1tHtlc S4uQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531+nuqecs25U+NjOxk0R0lr4jW4UubQwwCXHtpJZWSPWCpqWf0E p9GFG7ey0F83pFH81QxHi4Q= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxw0ezewbzdqXi+A7Qm17ezCsCcM/PouFs0NBJRv85Lui8iAqh8g1q6Z9yXvEljU1m59u0dFQ== X-Received: by 2002:aed:2fa1:: with SMTP id m30mr8228046qtd.306.1594783217063; Tue, 14 Jul 2020 20:20:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from generichostname (CPEc05627352ede-CM185933998587.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com. [174.112.146.193]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id x34sm1284253qtd.44.2020.07.14.20.20.15 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 14 Jul 2020 20:20:16 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2020 23:20:14 -0400 From: Denton Liu To: Johannes Schindelin Cc: phillip.wood@dunelm.org.uk, Philippe Blain , Git mailing list , Eric Sunshine , =?utf-8?B?w4Z2YXIgQXJuZmrDtnLDsA==?= Bjarmason , Jonathan Tan , Elijah Newren Subject: Re: [RFC] should `git rebase --keep-base` imply `--reapply-cherry-picks` ? Message-ID: <20200715032014.GA10818@generichostname> References: <0EA8C067-5805-40A7-857A-55C2633B8570@gmail.com> <20200714031017.GA15143@generichostname> <9c6dff59-b204-1ace-e0aa-0885dd502214@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Hi all, On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 10:38:23PM +0200, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > > To me the question is why are we looking at the upstream commits at all > > with `--keep-base`? I had expected `rebase --keep-base` to be the same > > as `rebase $(git merge-base [--fork-point] @{upstream} HEAD)` but > > looking at the code it seems to be `rebase --onto $(git merge-base > > @{upstream} HEAD) @{upstream}`. I didn't really follow the development > > of this feature - is there a reason we don't just use the merge-base as > > the upstream commit? It behaves this way mostly for unimportant reasons. The first is that my workflow before implementing this feature invoked running `git rebase --onto master... master` and I wanted to replicate that. More importantly, one feature of using the upstream I considered is documented in t3431. Essentially, if we have the following graph, A---B---D---E (master) \ C*---F---G (side) C was formerly part of master but master was rewound to remove C running `git rebase --keep-base --fork-point master` would drop C. > Those are interesting questions, indeed. > > And I dare to suspect that the answer is indeed: `--keep-base` really > should not only substitute `onto` but also `upstream` with the merge base. I would be open to changing the behaviour since the commit dropping isn't really a feature that I use very often. However, I am worried about pulling the rug out from other people if they use it since this is a documented feature in git-rebase.txt. Thanks, Denton > Ciao, > Dscho