From: Marc Branchaud <marcnarc@xiplink.com>
To: Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com>,
Ilya Kantor <iliakan@gmail.com>,
Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de>
Cc: git <git@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Is rebase --force-rebase any different from rebase --no-ff?
Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 15:27:24 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <98279912-0f52-969d-44a6-22242039387f@xiplink.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAGZ79kb05U91_Ku7DKuwQVCrtouYwGWTCPdJFQ=bgWo91inRGA@mail.gmail.com>
On 2018-05-09 02:21 PM, Stefan Beller wrote:
> +cc Marc and Johannes who know more about rebase.
>
> On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 9:01 AM, Ilya Kantor <iliakan@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Right now in "git help rebase" for --no-ff:
>> "Without --interactive, this is a synonym for --force-rebase."
>>
>> But *with* --interactive, is there any difference?
>
> I found
> https://code.googlesource.com/git/+/b499549401cb2b1f6c30d09681380fd519938eb0
> from 2010-03-24
In the original discussion around this option [1], at one point I
proposed teaching rebase--interactive to respect --force-rebase instead
of adding a new option [2]. Ultimately --no-ff was chosen as the better
user interface design [3], because an interactive rebase can't be
"forced" to run.
At the time, I think rebase--interactive only recognized --no-ff. That
might have been muddled a bit in the migration to rebase--helper.c.
Looking at it now, I don't have a strong opinion about keeping both
options or deprecating one of them.
M.
[1] https://public-inbox.org/git/4B9FD9C1.9060200@xiplink.com/t/
[2]
https://public-inbox.org/git/1269361187-31291-1-git-send-email-marcnarc@xiplink.com/
[3] https://public-inbox.org/git/7vzl1yd5j4.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org/
> Teach rebase the --no-ff option.
>
> For git-rebase.sh, --no-ff is a synonym for --force-rebase.
>
> For git-rebase--interactive.sh, --no-ff cherry-picks all the commits in
> the rebased branch, instead of fast-forwarding over any unchanged commits.
>
> --no-ff offers an alternative way to deal with reverted merges. Instead of
> "reverting the revert" you can use "rebase --no-ff" to recreate the branch
> with entirely new commits (they're new because at the very least the
> committer time is different). This obviates the need to revert the
> reversion, as you can re-merge the new topic branch directly. Added an
> addendum to revert-a-faulty-merge.txt describing the situation and how to
> use --no-ff to handle it.
>
> which sounds as if there is?
>
> Stefan
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-05-09 19:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-05-09 16:01 Is rebase --force-rebase any different from rebase --no-ff? Ilya Kantor
2018-05-09 18:21 ` Stefan Beller
2018-05-09 19:27 ` Marc Branchaud [this message]
2018-05-09 19:46 ` Ilya Kantor
2018-05-10 18:34 ` Marc Branchaud
2018-05-10 18:53 ` Ilya Kantor
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=98279912-0f52-969d-44a6-22242039387f@xiplink.com \
--to=marcnarc@xiplink.com \
--cc=Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=iliakan@gmail.com \
--cc=sbeller@google.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://80x24.org/mirrors/git.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).