From: "Martin Ågren" <firstname.lastname@example.org> To: "brian m. carlson" <email@example.com> Cc: Git Mailing List <firstname.lastname@example.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] docs: explain why reverts are not always applied on merge Date: Sun, 13 Sep 2020 17:12:00 +0200 [thread overview] Message-ID: <CAN0heSrQR+6SsPHFtqcjYeFe1ce5USTxkxLXZ4g2MCqbV20K6g@mail.gmail.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <email@example.com> On Sat, 12 Sep 2020 at 22:51, brian m. carlson <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote: > > A common scenario is for a user to apply a change to one branch and > cherry-pick it into another, then later revert it in the first branch. > This results in the change being present when the two branches are > merge, which is confusing to many users. s/merge/&d/ > +If this is a problem for you, you can do a rebase instead, rebasing the branch > +with the revert onto the other branch. A rebase in this scenario will revert > +the change, because a rebase applies each individual commit, including the > +revert. Should this include the usual disclaimer about only rebasing a branch if it hasn't been published or if you (and your team) is willing and able to handle the fallout? I dunno. This piece of text is vague enough that the reader will have to pick up the "rebase ... onto" keywords and figure out the details some other way (and to be clear: I think that's a good thing). I think that should be sufficient and they'll find the disclaimer when they look up "rebase", if they don't already know it. Martin
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-09-13 15:12 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2020-09-12 20:48 [PATCH 0/3] FAQ entries for merges and modified files brian m. carlson 2020-09-12 20:48 ` [PATCH 1/3] docs: explain why squash merges are broken with long-running branches brian m. carlson 2020-09-13 15:05 ` Martin Ågren 2020-09-13 17:12 ` brian m. carlson 2020-09-12 20:48 ` [PATCH 2/3] docs: explain why reverts are not always applied on merge brian m. carlson 2020-09-13 15:12 ` Martin Ågren [this message] 2020-09-12 20:48 ` [PATCH 3/3] docs: explain how to deal with files that are always modified brian m. carlson 2020-09-13 15:13 ` Martin Ågren 2020-09-12 21:48 ` [PATCH 0/3] FAQ entries for merges and modified files Junio C Hamano 2020-09-20 23:22 ` [PATCH v2 " brian m. carlson 2020-09-20 23:22 ` [PATCH v2 1/3] docs: explain why squash merges are broken with long-running branches brian m. carlson 2020-09-20 23:22 ` [PATCH v2 2/3] docs: explain why reverts are not always applied on merge brian m. carlson 2020-09-20 23:22 ` [PATCH v2 3/3] docs: explain how to deal with files that are always modified brian m. carlson
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=CAN0heSrQR+6SsPHFtqcjYeFe1ce5USTxkxLXZ4g2MCqbV20K6g@mail.gmail.com \ --email@example.com \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --email@example.com \ --subject='Re: [PATCH 2/3] docs: explain why reverts are not always applied on merge' \ /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
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this 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).