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=-2.8 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,T_DKIM_INVALID, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=no 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 B49DB1F404 for ; Wed, 7 Feb 2018 23:31:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751186AbeBGXbY (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Feb 2018 18:31:24 -0500 Received: from mail-wm0-f68.google.com ([74.125.82.68]:54104 "EHLO mail-wm0-f68.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751123AbeBGXbY (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Feb 2018 18:31:24 -0500 Received: by mail-wm0-f68.google.com with SMTP id t74so6224637wme.3 for ; Wed, 07 Feb 2018 15:31:23 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=sender:from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id :user-agent:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=iuyRmL7QW879dRX5I38T1lPnj7GCYn+kfSAlNjwj7AE=; b=TMOg3Vlxz8xzxOfQA61PHwZsvDkRHD4RBtfqne3hGXpkaZDWfFUHW9V19ZCZ2IthgN +taP/52/TymE6HrsfVQ67DNLSq7CJUh6eJmsaYm06jI8IOQBDWO4r5LoAM1KuFtU/8kb fwAynqDsfWOBZpga5trjOOUi1W5dKxvln55YTaHepYElNGnQUmUV10KPJp37eUOFhXRH YSN1WrvbOSsOnw1IHovirLZoQXSkFR63dx0v8Z5x6dA8fhkDltsG5YI7+0uzk/WiIAYt oVJDhTRyaTfy9k3SU6PTTYXHOgO76RjQbmNzcS+yAC2ZqHcawn4zW5ymoY2dNjez9vv8 RBbg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:from:to:cc:subject:references:date :in-reply-to:message-id:user-agent:mime-version :content-transfer-encoding; bh=iuyRmL7QW879dRX5I38T1lPnj7GCYn+kfSAlNjwj7AE=; b=I3GBP00FMHKJD0LlVDge5WIB+y4uMH8B4BxyW90sfi9l73Uz6A9p7fdg7yGS8Dd9vZ vNKfRPC5Ffl/Tnbd2xu5rhgp2BmOUM6WSvbnPZRhZfrMKkV06yq6O6pmkaq0OEpLGHDy n2Ss0IgAEBjOF+aNAMWTjShRl1QqOcYbvjO49gvOJlo/34ZocTSng6INfegqIF1ZXKcS /Yhj859oRt02pbZUMnOXZqYtOsMlmSuK02I49Rtx3cFnxA4In8VB3EYk5IiNeFbpw+6q pen4E7kiYuNPFPA3ZuPLWojsaFj+s1xopRhw2wnZPnTzfKrcTe0RqMPJYYimyT8BdUZl zJ4g== X-Gm-Message-State: APf1xPB5asUNrCBvyi0xgB6AndH/HsrPpTflE7r0AngW8XuWmejnP1nS YQpWuOhvvf4CaMPlNgL0VcY= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AH8x224LfqQZpsS1i3n/1OdAN0xNv6RWHuz+OQEHl+OtDau05UaGEV87potcGDAQJbUkMKE8qVB6DA== X-Received: by 10.28.105.80 with SMTP id e77mr3108316wmc.123.1518046282595; Wed, 07 Feb 2018 15:31:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (168.50.187.35.bc.googleusercontent.com. [35.187.50.168]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id h13sm4036240wrc.89.2018.02.07.15.31.21 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Wed, 07 Feb 2018 15:31:21 -0800 (PST) From: Junio C Hamano To: =?utf-8?Q?=C3=98yvind_R=C3=B8nningstad?= Cc: Johannes Schindelin , Sergey Organov , git@vger.kernel.org, Jacob Keller , Johannes Sixt Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/8] rebase: introduce the --recreate-merges option References: <71c42d6d3bb240d90071d5afdde81d1293fdf0ab.1516225925.git.johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> <87k1vpqq85.fsf@javad.com> <1518044326.7000.4.camel@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2018 15:31:20 -0800 In-Reply-To: <1518044326.7000.4.camel@gmail.com> (=?utf-8?Q?=22=C3=98yvind?= =?utf-8?Q?_R=C3=B8nningstad=22's?= message of "Wed, 07 Feb 2018 23:58:46 +0100") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.2.50 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Øyvind Rønningstad writes: >> So no, I do not think that --recreate-merges --first-parent is a good > idea >> at all. Unless you try to do that non-interactively only, *and > disallow it >> in interactive mode*. Correct. If the original side branch has commits A, B and C, you are rebuilding the topic to have only A and C but not B and then recreate the merge of that rebuilt topic, then you absolutely do not want "cherry-pick -m1" of the original merge when recreating the merge, as that would resurrect the effect of having B. The same argument applies if you rebuilt the topic with A and C and then a new commit D. "cherry-pick -m1" of the original would do a wrong thing. When there is no such fixing up, "cherry-pick -m1" is the right thing to do, though, so it probably makes sense to pick merges that way when the side topic being merged consists of the same commits as the original. I do not think that the code structure in the topic as posted makes it impossible (or unnecessarily hard) to give an enhancement like that in the future as a follow-up series.