Avery Pennarun wrote: > On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 4:52 AM, Michael J Gruber >> I think the OP's point was that filter-branch is better at keeping >> merges in place; I'm not sure if this is true when rebase-i is used with >> reword only. > > I've never actually tried the "--preserve-merges" option to git rebase > -i, but the description sounds as if it's supposed to not have this > problem. Can anyone confirm/deny? preserve-merges is in bad shape. I’d recommend not using it unless you’re willing to hack on it. Example issues: interacts poorly with merge.log, reordering commits produces very confusing results. Example of why it is not necessarily the tool for all seasons: requires a diff+apply cycle. If you are tracking large or binary files or amending a very old commit message, it makes more sense to avoid this overhead. See http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/143426 for example. Hope that helps, Jonathan -- 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