Re: git rebase -i
- From
Wincent Colaiuta <win@wincent.com>
- Date
- Feb 19, 2009, 09:59 UTC
- Message-ID
- <2A7CAA9F-DB42-4782-BF61-41E8DA577DF2@wincent.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <43d8ce650902190155m4de23643r8a9d3c35686ea4e9@mail.gmail.com>
El 19/2/2009, a las 10:55, John Tapsell escribió:
Show 33 quoted lines
> 2009/2/19 Wincent Colaiuta <win@wincent.com>: >> El 19/2/2009, a las 10:21, John Tapsell escribió: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> I often do 'git rebase -i HEAD~10' to rebase. Since afaics it >>> doesn't matter if you go back 'too far' I just always use HEAD~10 >>> even >>> if it's just for the last or so commit. >>> >>> Would there be any objections to making 'git rebase -i' default to >>> HEAD~10 or maybe 16 or 20. >> >> Sounds awfully arbitrary and counter-intuitive to me. >> >> Take a sample of Git users who know what "git rebase" does and ask >> them what >> they intuitively think "git rebase -i" without any additional >> arguments >> should do; I'd be _extremely_ surprised if they answered that it >> should >> default to HEAD~10, HEAD~16, HEAD~20, or HEAD~N for any N. >> >> (I could tell you what my intuition tells me, but I don't think >> it's very >> interesting.) > > It doesn't really matter if the user manages to guess what the number > N is, just that it's "recent commits". > > If a sample of git users would expect "git rebase -i" to let you > rebase the last few commits, then it doesn't really matter all that > much what N is. 10 seems a reasonable default as any.
That's exactly the problem. Most git users aren't going to expect "git rebase -i" to let you "rebase the last few commits".
Rebase is mostly used, talked about, and conceptualized in terms of rebasing onto other _branches_.
Cheers, Wincent