On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 06:47:58AM -0400, Greg Price wrote: > I agree with your footnote -- the more general case will require a > more powerful sequencer to support properly. And now I see that > Ramkumar Ramachandra is making progress on such a thing right now! > That's great news -- this is a project that has been attempted at > least four times, by five people (including me), in the last three > years. I hope to see this round make it in -- I was actually thinking > about returning to the problem after seeing this series through, but I > would be glad to see Ram beat me to it. [Hello, Ram!] Hmm, on further reading I'm not sure the sequencer Ram aims to build this summer actually extends to the "mark" and "reset" commands (or the concepts of "the rewritten <commit>" and "detach" in the pseudo-TODO notation of your footnote) that would be required to implement this broader rewrite-side-branches feature. It looks like the focus may be on taking the existing features of rebase and bringing them into C. This sounds great too -- it should make rebase a lot faster -- but it will leave open the pet project I've thought about returning to, of making "rebase -i -p" work correctly even when the user wants to rearrange the commits rather than just s/pick/edit/ etc. That will require implementing a richer sequencer very like the one required for a general rewrite-side-branches feature. Ram, have I correctly read your plans? For context, see Junio's remarks upthread about one thing a richer sequencer could be used for: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/176339/focus=176359 Greg -- 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