Re: Effective difference between git-rebase and git-resolve
- From
- Marc Singer <elf@buici.com>
- Date
- Mar 25, 2006, 06:32 UTC
- Message-ID
- <20060325063225.GA13791@buici.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <7v64m3ys3a.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>
On Fri, Mar 24, 2006 at 10:08:09PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Show 13 quoted lines
> > Junio, is there some magic to restart a rebase after you've fixed up the > > conflicts? > > The modern rebase is essentially git-format-patch piped to > git-am (with -3 flag to allow falling back to three-way merge), > and all the familiar "the patch did not apply -- what now?" > techniques can be employed. > > Since the pre-image blobs recorded in the intermediate > format-patch output by definition exist in your repository, it > always falls back to three-way merge when the patch does not > apply cleanly. Then you can resolve and say "git am --resolved" > to continue.
By modern do you mean newer than 1.2.4? I comprehend what you're layin' down here, but I don't know if I need to do something different.
Moreover, it isn't clear to me if git-rebase is better than git-merge.