Re: hgmq vs. StGIT
- From
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
- Date
- Nov 1, 2005, 16:00 UTC
- Message-ID
- <Pine.LNX.4.64.0511010757040.27915@g5.osdl.org>
- In-Reply-To
- <20051101141149.GA26847@watt.suse.com>
On Tue, 1 Nov 2005, Chris Mason wrote:
> > StGIT has the ability to rebase patches via three-way merge. This is > still on my todo list for mq.
Btw, I have to say that I was a bit uncertain about doing the rebasing by way of a three-way merge, but when I recently did a revert, I was _really_ happy with how well "git revert" did the rebasing of the revert. It wasn't even a clean merge, but leaving the conflict in the tree and allowing me to fix it up made what would otherwise have been a much more complex manual operation be 99% automated.
So I'm _neither_ a StGIT not mq user, but I can definitely say that rebasing with a three-way merge instead of just trying to apply the patch (whether in reverse like in a merge, or just re-apply it straigt) is really really nice.
Linus