Re: [RFC] git-brebase
- From
- Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com>
- Date
- Oct 3, 2026, 21:17 UTC
- Message-ID
- <asFw4gsn253MQtxp@ubby>
- In-Reply-To
- <asFtLJDJliQBPe1c@debian>
On Sat, Oct 03, 2026 at 11:07:04PM +0200, Alejandro Colomar wrote:
> Since --abort doesn't go all the way back, I think --continue shouldn't > continue all the way forward, for consistency.
Fair.
Show 12 quoted lines
> If that's desired behavior, it should go in this tool, and not as part > of git-rebase(1). git-rebase(1) is a much simpler and much more > fundamental tool, which is used to build this more complex tool. > That's one reason I'm rather opposed to having this as part of > git-rebase(1); it would confuse about the responsibility of > git-rebase(1). IMO, git-rebase(1) is a plumbing command, and > git-brebase would be a porcelain thingy. > > > If we take this approach then we'd need an option not to enable this > > behavior but to disable it, something like `--direct`. > > That hints it might be just be a different command.
If this was 2007, and you were writing the first version of `rebase`, and you had already worked out that you wanted this feature, what would you do then? Would you make it the default? I _think_ I would.
Basically, this makes rebasing much nicer, so why not make it the default?
Nico