Re: stg pull/rebase

From: Karl Hasselström <kha@treskal.com>
Date: Jun 7, 2008, 19:08 UTC
Message-ID: <20080607190848.GA7853@diana.vm.bytemark.co.uk>
In-Reply-To: <m3y75hw3an.fsf@localhost.localdomain>

On 2008-06-07 10:41:41 -0700, Jakub Narebski wrote:

Show 7 quoted lines

> Karl Hasselström <kha@treskal.com> writes:
>
> >   * Just one command, stg pull. stg rebase is removed.
>
> And I would have to learn to use other command (I use very
> frequently the following sequence: git remote update && stg rebase
> <branch>)? Not nice.

Right. We could keep "stg rebase" for backwards compatibility. (It would mean stg pull --rebase.) I like to complain about the too-large number of stg subcommands, but upset users are even less desirable ... :-)

> I already have to use two commands: "stg refresh && stg edit" to
> make a change which affects how commit message is written, instead
> of simplier "stg refresh --edit".

Yes, sorry about that. You have pointed it out before, and I've been meaning to fix it.

Show 6 quoted lines

> >    2. Depending on the configuration (overridable by the
> >       --fast-forward, --rebase, and --merge options), one of these
> >       three things happen:
>
> Couldn't then "stg rebase" be 'internal alias' to "git pull
> --rebase"?

Absolutely.

Show 7 quoted lines

> >   * The default action is to fast-forward, which is probably what
> >     most users want -- merge is very likely to do the wrong thing,
> >     and rebase can lose changes.
>
> Unless you want to rebase on top of different branch, for example
> moving stack from 'master' to 'next', or when you work on top of
> branch which doesn't fast-forward, like 'pu' in git repository.

Yes, definitely. rebase would stay a "first-class citizen". But I really do think that having fast-forward as an option is nice; in many cases you build on top of a non-rebasing branch, and having the tool verify that you don't lose commits is a good thing.

And when the user says just "stg pull" (having configured nothing) it's probably best to default to the simplest and safest of the three: fast-forward. If the user wants "rebase", it'd be available either with the command-line option or with a (per-branch) config file setting.

-- 
Karl Hasselström, kha@treskal.com
      www.treskal.com/kalle