From: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 18:18:43 GMT
Subject: Re: rebase -p confusion in 1.6.1
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.1.00.0901151918320.3586@pacific.mpi-cbg.de>
In-Reply-To: <496F6AC3.7050704@drmicha.warpmail.net>

Hi,

On Thu, 15 Jan 2009, Michael J Gruber wrote:

> Johannes Schindelin venit, vidit, dixit 15.01.2009 17:04:
> ...
> >>> The more I think about it, I think it's possible I broke it with the 
> >>> introduction of the "noop".
> >> It certainly worked after the noop introduction before the r-i-p series, 
> >> but not any more after.
> > 
> > Umm... which rebase -i -p series do you mean?  "noop" was introduced 
> > pretty recently if my Alzheimered brain does not fool me.
> 
> This one introduced noop:
> 
> commit ff74126c03a8dfd04e7533573a5c420f2a7112ac
> Author: Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de>
> Date:   Fri Oct 10 13:42:12 2008 +0200
> 
>     rebase -i: do not fail when there is no commit to cherry-pick
> 
> This is the bad one from bisect:
> 
> commit d80d6bc146232d81f1bb4bc58e5d89263fd228d4
> Author: Stephen Haberman <stephen@exigencecorp.com>
> Date:   Wed Oct 15 02:44:39 2008 -0500
> 
>     rebase-i-p: do not include non-first-parent commits touching UPSTREAM
> 
> It's the last one in a longer series. And that series is after the noop
> introduction.

Ohhh....

Thanks,
Dscho