On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 06:16:05PM +0700, Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy wrote:
> > The reason that git does not bother storing "where did I start this
> > branch" is that it is usually not useful. The right question is usually
> > "what is the merge base". There are exceptions, of course (e.g., if you
> > are asking something like "what work did I do while checked out on the
> > 'foo' branch"). But for merging and rebasing, I think the computed
> > merge-base is much more likely to do what people want.
>
> Rebasing is exactly why I want this. Merge base works most of the time
> until you rewrite upstream (which I do sometimes).
True, although wouldn't you generally want to rebase it on top of the
rewritten upstream in that case (which is what "pull --rebase" will do,
by scanning the reflog for the last version of the upstream that you
actually built on).
> There are also cases when I create a branch without upstream, or when
> upstream is renamed. Still, making "rebase -i --topic" == "rebase -i
> $(git merge-base HEAD @{upstream})" would be cool.
Yeah. I usually just do "rebase -i @{upstream}" which picks the same
commits, but moves to the updated version of upstream (IOW, I both
rewrite and move forward at the same time). But there is value in
rewriting without moving forward in many workflows. That seems like a
sensible feature to me.
-Peff
--
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