From: Yann Dirson <ydirson@altern.org>
Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2007 19:42:23 GMT
Subject: Re: Rebasing stgit stacks
Message-ID: <20070118194208.GJ9761@nan92-1-81-57-214-146.fbx.proxad.net>
In-Reply-To: <tnxmz4gv8sj.fsf@arm.com>

On Thu, Jan 18, 2007 at 12:06:20PM +0000, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> Yann Dirson <ydirson@altern.org> wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 17, 2007 at 12:30:18AM +0100, Jakub Narebski wrote:
> >> I'm all for calling this command "stg rebase".
> >
> > After all, my current implementation as "pull --to" mostly bypasses
> > the fetch, so it probably makes sense to use a new command.
> >
> > However, "stg rebase <target>" does not sound right.  I'm not very
> > happy with "stg rebaseto <target>" (or rebase-to) either.
> 
> I think something 'stg rebase <newbase>' sounds OK.

It's just that it sounds more natural to me to give as instruction "do
rebase (current stack) to that point" than "do rebase that point",
which "rebase <newbase>" would seem to imply.

Best reagards,
-- 
Yann.