From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.0 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI, RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 728B120281 for ; Fri, 15 Sep 2017 20:52:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751734AbdIOUwL (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Sep 2017 16:52:11 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com ([64.147.108.71]:63086 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751685AbdIOUwK (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Sep 2017 16:52:10 -0400 Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 506889A6F7; Fri, 15 Sep 2017 16:52:09 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=iXP6cGmx83ZPB870UMxUQl03zpY=; b=sGX86l kHI4hjxTbmiiSpy2zV6jE6sDBzCgnV9pN1SpXOHAeS77hwTTJsm7vkTRiMcS+vB9 DKzdnpLceqnV3VDsvpkYAq9K+pIniab7BUckSCqfE+h0bXUrcb8C2mANu994UAOs ptKut+hT4iZreY22BKW6nDuvCYQ8WPIGWGJwY= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=Yv1ts8d0X6ANrsI/Cg0rvfkNmH5oD35Q ZXdWBIFhwNv5QadnY32Pudlyvpp+QZ2SpqayanJ/qmDetn2SvLCL5/Towu6LQDbE QjwyKu7jTLWo/m3Pt4lwAuaZA8+XHu5a8jblWmEve1WNEUuRB9oq6akG/r0/06dq YTQedfKZn4g= Received: from pb-smtp2.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 471EB9A6F5; Fri, 15 Sep 2017 16:52:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [104.132.0.95]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 99B209A6F4; Fri, 15 Sep 2017 16:52:08 -0400 (EDT) From: Junio C Hamano To: Sebastian Schuberth Cc: Jonathan Nieder , Martin =?utf-8?Q?=C3=85gren?= , Git Mailing List Subject: Re: Commit dropped when swapping commits with rebase -i -p References: <20170902000417.GE143138@aiede.mtv.corp.google.com> Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2017 05:52:07 +0900 In-Reply-To: (Sebastian Schuberth's message of "Mon, 11 Sep 2017 10:45:40 +0200") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: BD4FED2A-9A57-11E7-A517-9D2B0D78B957-77302942!pb-smtp2.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Sebastian Schuberth writes: > On 2017-09-02 02:04, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > >>> Anyway, this should really more explicitly say *what* you need to know >>> about, that is, reordering commits does not work. >> >> It tries to explain that, even with an example. If you have ideas for >> improving the wording, that would be welcome. > > As a first step, I indeed believe the wording must the stronger / clearer. How about this: > > From f69854ce7b9359603581317d152421ff6d89f345 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: Sebastian Schuberth > Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2017 10:41:27 +0200 > Subject: [PATCH] docs: use a stronger wording when describing bugs with rebase -i -p > > Signed-off-by: Sebastian Schuberth > --- > Documentation/git-rebase.txt | 9 +++++---- > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/Documentation/git-rebase.txt b/Documentation/git-rebase.txt > index 6805a74aec..ccd0a04d54 100644 > --- a/Documentation/git-rebase.txt > +++ b/Documentation/git-rebase.txt > @@ -782,10 +782,11 @@ case" recovery too! > > BUGS > ---- > -The todo list presented by `--preserve-merges --interactive` does not > -represent the topology of the revision graph. Editing commits and > -rewording their commit messages should work fine, but attempts to > -reorder commits tend to produce counterintuitive results. > +Be careful when combining the `-i` / `--interactive` and `-p` / > +`--preserve-merges` options. Reordering commits will drop commits from the > +main line. This is because the todo list does not represent the topology of the > +revision graph in this case. However, editing commits and rewording their > +commit messages 'should' work fine. > > For example, an attempt to rearrange > ------------ Anybody? I personally feel that the updated text is not all that stronger but it is clearer by clarifying what "counterintuitive results" actually mean, but I am not the target audience this paragraph is trying to help, nor I am the one who is making excuse for a known bug, so...