Re: dangling commits
- From
- Marco Roeland <marco.roeland@xs4all.nl>
- Date
- Jan 16, 2006, 12:40 UTC
- Message-ID
- <20060116124020.GB5356@fiberbit.xs4all.nl>
- In-Reply-To
- <43CB8BFC.8050900@op5.se>
On Monday January 16th 2006 Andreas Ericsson wrote:
> The blobs are immutable and never change for a rebase, unless the > file(s) it applies to is changed in master as well. It's the commits > that do because they get new parents.
Ah, I need to rebase my mental picture of what a "rebase" is. ;-) And the fact that each commit _does_ have sort of a blob (well in my mind I called it so, the file under .git/objects, although its proper name is indeed "commit") in the repository doesn't make it any easier!
Current documentation about git-rebase(1) is technically correct of course then: "rebases local commits to the new head of the upstream tree" but rather sparse for the less initiated. In Dutch we have an expression for this, to "not be able to see the wood because of the trees", which is rather appropriate here. Perhaps we can introduce "liana" as an alternative for commit.
<Nice young men in clean white coats come in to take me away>
Seriously, yours and other peoples comments make the picture much clearer to me and help out enormously to me and hopefully other lurkers in working with git and more advanced SCM in general. Thanks,
-- Marco Roeland