From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.1 (2015-04-28) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.6 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,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.1 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 041B51F516 for ; Thu, 21 Jun 2018 21:22:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754017AbeFUVWc (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Jun 2018 17:22:32 -0400 Received: from mail-ua0-f194.google.com ([209.85.217.194]:43138 "EHLO mail-ua0-f194.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933162AbeFUVWb (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Jun 2018 17:22:31 -0400 Received: by mail-ua0-f194.google.com with SMTP id z16-v6so2964893uaz.10 for ; Thu, 21 Jun 2018 14:22:30 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=I6NZj11LakmXOnunn439mBNUMsTY9yK6DVOd+O84SMI=; b=m9ASeiC7e8gNp+pXzRAfFi1T/80LnCc2884sIkFXAjop1/A1zjUR816FLmVEx0cDRV 74Q/PhvtAWCY2Kuot2a8ABZGNwV/e+L5lPQ9A5HRR1RaTrXVnLtehD/FuP7bQ2vPeKp8 P1XVeXA7NtMi2pOay9LSLfKnr2pU/zDq2QmeYhxvDThCPMeEWMLKN/OxQqEYQyC7FyZh OS78x0KBQm++SNRcRap9S0JldTzMSGmJr+E1vg0UA9ZsiwjP5b3H8aTyWgsEtzZx0q/+ I0fQB4uRq0qlP66oHXOfzMmh4hoR8WG/Ru0v3kJRwkOTZzljAQUsKRzx5BYoSABZkixp ekDA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=I6NZj11LakmXOnunn439mBNUMsTY9yK6DVOd+O84SMI=; b=kKHOmBHCHlf3J0/yGmQYX9Sjnwcn7KyHpSfJYcSb9q2zQXgBL15rqVsKjks76PM76X YsUYQ9jQTg5Yu44zLfPVP5+Jrib55l+Wa6y8bRisHfiCe/Ubf+qHuCq8SpsyBe2zBuKj RSrQgWxbYd/Gv+HdBC9F2sk2PRWjA7X6XqDnaia7nrSblwSM5bOJgbpMWZBFwZFZN8Vy mmLJCsJ7/VZUCcPglYaWAr9mayTY9kchbjHMoJxBDFyAclxuguTFWIC5ei56dexaE+6k EFO7g0ElQWIRBLhLKoWmCevI+cOV5+vxmDFs1tSSqBT/58TEn405kgkxNJKFOpSz26/f HNeg== X-Gm-Message-State: APt69E2Zy1mivAe+TruFPQOx8jcGxT3RTiTEobr7jkaBSkTwv6ulwB8n k4uOpQN4Fr9VVPlApTlY+jqCKXzenwjLnZZHbZM= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADUXVKJjq2rC0LNOlTj3bjsD8Puja4gQUeQa1Uhmwjnm095NzWu/Mdy4/WcEpFMnwBQ+XP8C3TMvCA3UaA+QECmJgm4= X-Received: by 2002:ab0:84b:: with SMTP id b11-v6mr17573448uaf.79.1529616150147; Thu, 21 Jun 2018 14:22:30 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 2002:ab0:5f28:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Thu, 21 Jun 2018 14:22:29 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <20180617055856.22838-1-newren@gmail.com> <20180621150023.23533-1-newren@gmail.com> <20180621150023.23533-7-newren@gmail.com> From: Elijah Newren Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2018 14:22:29 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 6/7] git-rebase.txt: address confusion between --no-ff vs --force-rebase To: Junio C Hamano Cc: Git Mailing List , Phillip Wood , Johannes Schindelin , Eric Sunshine Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 1:46 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Elijah Newren writes: > >> rebase was taught the --force-rebase option in commit b2f82e05de ("Teach >> rebase to rebase even if upstream is up to date", 2009-02-13). This flag >> worked for the am and merge backends, but wasn't a valid option for the >> interactive backend. >> ... >> INCOMPATIBLE OPTIONS >> -------------------- >> >> @@ -559,11 +549,6 @@ Other incompatible flag pairs: >> BEHAVIORAL INCONSISTENCIES >> -------------------------- >> >> - * --no-ff vs. --force-rebase >> - >> - These options are actually identical, though their description >> - leads people to believe they might not be. > > Ah, I should have held off my review of 5/7 before reading this one. > Perhaps we want to do this before the step 5/7 to reduce the churn? Sure, I can switch the order around.