On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 3:22 PM, Sverre Rabbelier <srabbelier@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 15:16, Avery Pennarun <apenwarr@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> This would resolve any other inconsistencies between the two as well, >> notably that non-interactive rebase sometimes refuses to do the rebase >> I requested because "Current branch master is up to date," while >> interactive rebase is willing to do it. (Personally I prefer the >> latter behaviour, since I don't like tools that think they're smarter >> than me :)) > > I taught rebase the -f|--force-rebase flag a little while back, you > could use that :). Thanks, I didn't know about that one. But my general point is still: we seem to have two implementations when the functionality of one is actually a superset of the other. As far as I can see, anyway. So the obvious way to reduce the duplicated code is to simply eliminate the less-featureful implementation. Avery -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html