Re: What's cooking in git.git (topics)
- From
Jakub Narebski <jnareb@gmail.com>
- Date
- Nov 26, 2007, 09:03 UTC
- Message-ID
- <fie23u$5tc$1@ger.gmane.org>
- In-Reply-To
- <alpine.LFD.0.99999.0711252324360.9605@xanadu.home>
Nicolas Pitre wrote:
Show 13 quoted lines
> On Mon, 26 Nov 2007, J. Bruce Fields wrote: > >> I do find that trying to work on top of a constantly rebased branch is >> annoying no matter how I do it. So I sometimes wonder if we shouldn't >> instead be finding ways to avoid the practice. > > I don't think it can't be avoided in many cases. Some stuff gets > rebased because it has to be refined before it is merged in a more > stable and more "official" repository. Working on top of a rebased > branch could be much easier if there was a dedicated command to perform > the local rebase of one's work after a fetch, just like the pull command > does a merge after a fetch, at which point both work flows would be > almost equivalent wrt ease of use.
There was idea of 'rebase' merge strategy (which was in some form implemented once under another name: check archives if you want). And there is an idea of --rebase switch git git-pull.
What is left is the implementation ;-)
-- Jakub Narebski Warsaw, Poland ShadeHawk on #git