Re: rebase vs rebase -i

From: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Date: Feb 4, 2010, 13:27 UTC
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.1.00.1002041414530.4505@intel-tinevez-2-302>
In-Reply-To: <76718491002032019i5f8ea947paa527988ddb7a378@mail.gmail.com>

Hi,

On Wed, 3 Feb 2010, Jay Soffian wrote:

> Why does git rebase use format-patch + am, while rebase -i uses 
> cherry-pick?

Hysterical raisins. 'rebase -i' started out as 'edit-patch-series.sh', hacked together in 4 hours on a lazy Saturday afternoon: http://colabti.org/irclogger/irclogger_log/git?date=2007-02-27#l97

Ah, the old days. Back when I had enough time to read through Peff's mails. And back when I had enough time to cobble together fun Git scripts.

Show 14 quoted lines

> Just curious. In particular though, it seems especially odd in this 
> case:
> 
> $ git rebase --onto <newbase> <upstream>
> 
> vs
> 
> $ env GIT_EDITOR=true git rebase -i --onto <newbase> <upstream>
> 
> Both in theory produce an identical end-result, while using two
> different implementations.
> 
> (Here I'm setting GIT_EDITOR=true just to demonstrate that I didn't
> change the list of commits in the latter case.)

You can get _exactly_ the same behavior if you use -m.

Ciao, Dscho