Re: [PATCH v2 04/13] Teach rebase interactive the mark command
Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> writes:
Show 44 quoted lines
> On Tue, 29 Apr 2008, Johannes Sixt wrote:
>
>> Junio C Hamano schrieb:
>> > This is just a minor syntax issue and I am not sure why we got into
>> > this misunderstanding, but let's try again. Suppose you want to
>> > recreate this history on top of a different O'. For merges, upper
>> > parents are earlier ones:
>> >
>> > A reset O'
>> > / \ pick B
>> > / X reset O'
>> > / / \ pick A
>> > O---B Z merge B -- recreate X
>> > \ \ / reset O'
>> > \ Y pick C
>> > \ / merge B? -- recreate Y
>> > C reset B -- go back to recreated X
>> > merge B? -- recreate Z
>> >
>> > The above sequence does not work.
>>
>> Because it is hand-crafted. I'd expect rebase to suggest a series that
>> works as long as the user doesn't modify it. Like this:
>>
>> reset O'
>> pick C
>> reset O'
>> pick B
>> merge C -- recreate Y
>> reset O'
>> pick A
>> merge B -- recreate X
>> merge Y -- recreate Z
>>
>> Here all commit names are clearly the original in the first insn that
>> references it, and the rewritten version in later references. No marks
>> needed.
>>
>> If the user modifies the insns, he better knows what he's doing, in
>> particular, when it's necessary to rebuild such complex histories.
>
> I fully agree. rebase -i is _not_ about the same goal as git-sequencer.
> rebase -i is about user interaction. sequencer is about having a common
> plumbing for the different porcelains.
The problem is that both of you stopped reading after the part you quoted.