On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 11:53 AM, John Keeping <john@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Commit 15a147e (rebase: use @{upstream} if no upstream specified,
> 2011-02-09) says:
>
> Make it default to 'git rebase @{upstream}'. That is also what
> 'git pull [--rebase]' defaults to, so it only makes sense that
> 'git rebase' defaults to the same thing.
>
> but that isn't actually the case. Since commit d44e712 (pull: support
> rebased upstream + fetch + pull --rebase, 2009-07-19), pull has actually
> chosen the most recent reflog entry which is an ancestor of the current
> branch if it can find one.
>
> Change rebase so that it uses the same logic.
>
> Signed-off-by: John Keeping <john@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> git-rebase.sh | 8 ++++++++
> t/t3400-rebase.sh | 6 ++++--
> 2 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/git-rebase.sh b/git-rebase.sh
> index 226752f..fd36cf7 100755
> --- a/git-rebase.sh
> +++ b/git-rebase.sh
> @@ -437,6 +437,14 @@ then
> error_on_missing_default_upstream "rebase" "rebase" \
> "against" "git rebase <branch>"
> fi
> + for reflog in $(git rev-list -g "$upstream_name" 2>/dev/null)
> + do
> + if test "$reflog" = "$(git merge-base "$reflog" HEAD)"
> + then
> + upstream_name=$reflog
> + break
> + fi
> + done
> ;;
> *) upstream_name="$1"
> shift
A little later, "onto_name" gets assigned like so:
onto_name=${onto-"$upstream_name"}
So if upstream_name was set above, then onto would get the same value,
which is not what we want, right? It seems like this block of code
should come a bit later.
I also think it not be run only when rebase was run without a given
upstream. If the configured upstream is "origin/master", it seems like
it would be surprising to get different behavior from "git rebase" and
"git rebase origin/master".
--
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