Re: Current state / standard advice for rebasing merges without information loss/re-entry?
- From
Martin von Zweigbergk <martinvonz@gmail.com>
- Date
- Apr 19, 2022, 15:32 UTC
- Message-ID
- <CANiSa6hEJMWPyfZ_KqgHcKXhMdT7doTnxkK7GZzf-QBh6DhATg@mail.gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <xmqq35iaz6n3.fsf@gitster.g>
On Tue, Apr 19, 2022 at 6:57 AM Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
Show 7 quoted lines
> > Philip Oakley <philipoakley@iee.email> writes: > > > So, essentially, it's talking a small part of the rerere-train at each > > step in the replay, so that it's more focussed. > > That reminds me of one topic.
And it reminds me of a discussion about first-class conflicts vs rerere I had recently [1] (Philip's email hasn't been delivered to me yet). As I wrote there, I think most of rerere's use cases can be fulfilled by first-class conflicts. I understand that it would be a huge project (much more than appropriate for GSoC :)) to add such support to Git. I just want to make sure the project is aware of the idea.
[1] https://github.com/martinvonz/jj/issues/175#issuecomment-1079831788