Re: is rebase the same as merging every commit?

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Petr Baudis
Date: Friday, June 27, 2008 - 1:34 am

On Fri, Jun 27, 2008 at 08:30:56AM +0200, Matthieu Moy wrote:

I don't think you can call it correct since it assumes !(2) while (2)
holds. Drawing the diagram this way is misleading; merging commits
one-by-one implies preserving the merge information in the history
graph; nothing like that is done by rebase.

Rebase is more like _cherry-picking_ all the patches on your branch on
top of the upstream branch. You just essentially take each patch (commit
message + diff to parent) growing on top of upstream's E and recommit it
on top of G.

..snip..

Indeed, noone forces you into the rebase workflow for your own projects.
I personally never ever rebase (I do use StGIT though, but it records
per-patch history and makes sure I'm always in some consistent state).

-- 
				Petr "Pasky" Baudis
The last good thing written in C++ was the Pachelbel Canon. -- J. Olson
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
is rebase the same as merging every commit?, David Jeske, (Thu Jun 26, 4:04 pm)
Re: is rebase the same as merging every commit?, Matthieu Moy, (Thu Jun 26, 11:30 pm)
Re: is rebase the same as merging every commit?, David Jeske, (Thu Jun 26, 11:46 pm)
Re: is rebase the same as merging every commit?, Petr Baudis, (Fri Jun 27, 1:34 am)