git/list[1] front-page[2] threads[3] people[4] search[5] about
 

Re: [RFC] should `git rebase --keep-base` imply `--reapply-cherry-picks` ?

From
Denton Liu <liu.denton@gmail.com>
Date
Jul 14, 2020, 03:10 UTC
Message-ID
<20200714031017.GA15143@generichostname>
In-Reply-To
<0EA8C067-5805-40A7-857A-55C2633B8570@gmail.com>
Hi Philippe,
On Mon, Jul 13, 2020 at 10:44:06PM -0400, Philippe Blain wrote:
Show 6 quoted lines
> Hello,
> 
> I learned today that doing `git rebase --keep-base master` 
> will drop commits that were cherry-picked from master to the current branch. 
> I was simply doing a code clean up on my feature branch (the full command was
> `git rebase -i --keep-base master`), and this kind of confused me for a moment.
Glad I'm not the only one using this feature :)
Show 5 quoted lines
> Is this a sane default ? I understand that it is a good default when we are rebasing 
> *on top* of master, but here I'm just doing some squashing and fixup's and I did not
> want the commit I had cherry-picked from master to disappear (yet). In fact, because it
> was dropped, it created a modify/delete conflict because in a subsequent commit 
> in my feature branch I'm modifying files that are added in the commit I cherry-picked.
So if I'm not mistaken, if we have the following graph
	A - B - C - D (master)
	     \
	       - C' - D (feature)

and we do `git rebase --keep-base master` from feature, C' will be dropped? Indeed, I am surprised by how this interacts with the default setting of --reapply-cherry-picks.

> How would a change that made '--reapply-cherry-picks' be the default when using 'keep-base'
> be received ?

I'm somewhat surprised that --no-reapply-cherry-picks is the default. I would argue that it _shouldn't_ be the default at all. It's an optimisation for when no --onto or --keep-base are specified but it definitely can cause problems otherwise, as we've seen.

I think I would argue for the following in decreasing order of preference:

	1. Make --no-reapply-cherry-picks the default in all cases.
	   (Those who need the optimisation can enable it manually and
	   we can add a configuration option for it.)
	2. Make --no-reapply-cherry-picks only active if no --onto or
	   --keep-base are given (--keep-base is a special case of --onto
	   so we only have to handle it in one place).
> Tangential question: in any case, would it make sense to still add the "dropped because 
> already upstream" commits to the todo list, in the case of an interactive rebase ? 
> (maybe commented out, or listed as 'drop' with some kind of comment saying those 
> are dropped because they appear textually upstream?)
That would make sense to me. I don't have a preference between either.
Thanks,
Denton
> Cheers,
> Philippe.
> P.S. I CC'd those who were involved with the 'keep-base' patch or the 'reapply-cherry-picks' patch.
Previous: Philippe BlainNext: Jonathan Tan
Message 2 of 8 in “[RFC] should `git rebase --keep-base` imply `--reapply-cherry-picks` ?”
  1. Philippe BlainJul 14, 2020
  2. Denton LiuJul 14, 2020
  3. Jonathan TanJul 14, 2020
  4. Denton LiuJul 15, 2020
  5. Phillip WoodJul 14, 2020
  6. Johannes SchindelinJul 14, 2020
  7. Denton LiuJul 15, 2020
  8. Phillip WoodJul 15, 2020

Read the whole thread, see it on lore, or plain text.

$ cat FOOTERMessages come from the public archive at lore.kernel.org/git, fetched every hour. The front page is chosen and written each morning by an AI editor and can be wrong; the threads themselves are the record. About and API. For agents: an MCP server at https://gitlist.dev/mcp, and any thread, story or person page as Markdown by adding .md to its URL (or sending Accept: text/markdown). Details in /llms.txt.