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-ASN: AS3215 2.6.0.0/16 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.6 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from out1.vger.email (out1.vger.email [IPv6:2620:137:e000::1:20]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id D923C1F4CE for ; Wed, 13 Apr 2022 17:06:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S233448AbiDMRHd (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 Apr 2022 13:07:33 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:47070 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S237194AbiDMRH1 (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 Apr 2022 13:07:27 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com (pb-smtp2.pobox.com [64.147.108.71]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BF09D2FE46 for ; Wed, 13 Apr 2022 10:05:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 15DC7125B3E; Wed, 13 Apr 2022 13:05:05 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=/xwIYp87PcssBcnDh2OO2guqa7Z9gx913F8avn OJphM=; b=WVe/YJXanf+nw7zqj/y1qHNP+loVoYWp8CpYT7n2mNaQtvrqR6pcmj 3wWCuPd6fnCNsAlGb+37c4i7KMBwRDXQKnV/g1bcEJ+HJVb7h62JcoYFGbi6D8pT Kn78508Oubes9L8LCzy3vdfnhx/Bf0Zt3to0rZXOZ+eHu5UtCux4k= Received: from pb-smtp2.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 06DDD125B3C; Wed, 13 Apr 2022 13:05:05 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [35.185.214.157]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 48FBC125B3A; Wed, 13 Apr 2022 13:05:04 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Edmundo Carmona Antoranz Cc: git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC] introducing git replay References: <20220413164336.101390-1-eantoranz@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2022 10:05:03 -0700 In-Reply-To: <20220413164336.101390-1-eantoranz@gmail.com> (Edmundo Carmona Antoranz's message of "Wed, 13 Apr 2022 18:43:35 +0200") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: DCCFB6C0-BB4B-11EC-B547-CB998F0A682E-77302942!pb-smtp2.pobox.com Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Edmundo Carmona Antoranz writes: > This is a RFC because: > - Perhaps it is already possible to do it with git rebase > to achieve the same? But I haven't seen a recipe that > gets it done in stackoverflow, at least. Without thinking about it too much, out of gut reaction, it looks like a better target for fast-export piped to fast-import than rebase or amend, if all it can do is to replay on _identical_ state and nothing else. > Let me know what you think. > Interesting? Not? If this _were_ to allow some slight deviations of the base and carry the differences forward, then it definitely belongs to rebase, and perhaps "rebase --replay-merges" should be taught to behave better without introducing a new option. But otherwise, I do not think it is all that useful. Also, if this _were_ to allow recreating the shape of the history, using updated tips of branches that were merged in the original history, perhaps taking hints from "Merge branch X into Y" in the original merge commit's log messages, that would be quite useful addition to the rebase mechanism, but this is not that. So, not really, to me at least.