The 11/05/11, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Richard Peterson <richard@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 7:26 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > >> Devils lie in the details. For example, should squash/fixup come before > >> or after the squashed commit when --reverse is in effect, and why? > >> > >> Should "rebase --reverse --continue" work after it gets interrupted, if > >> not why not? > > > > Yes, it should work,... > > Of course, if you start with --reverse, it is clear and obvious that > 'continue' should continue with the reversed instruction sheet, and it > probabaly should take --reverse as a no-op when given with --continue. > The original question should have been written more carefully to avoid > soliciting the response that addresses that uninteresting case. I don't understand. Why not just _display_ the commit in reverse order? Then, from the user POV commands like squash, fixup, etc would apply in reverse order too (from up to down); keeping the mental model for "apply against ancestor". -- Nicolas Sebrecht -- 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