Hi Jake, On Thu, 8 Mar 2018, Jacob Keller wrote: > On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 3:20 AM, Phillip Wood <phillip.wood@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > I did wonder about using 'pick <original-merge>' for rebasing merges > > and keeping 'merge ...' for recreating them but I'm not sure if that > > is a good idea. It has the advantage that the user cannot specify the > > wrong parents for the merge to be rebased as 'git rebase' would work > > out if the parents have been rebased, but maybe it's a bit magical to > > use pick for merge commits. Also there isn't such a simple way for the > > user to go from 'rabase this merge' to 'recreate this merge' as they'd > > have to write the whole merge line themselves (though I guess > > something like emacs' git-rebase.el would be able to help with that) > > Since the ultimate commit hashes of newly rebased commits would be > unknown at the time of writing the todo file, I'm not sure how this > would work to specify the parents? I agree with Phillip's follow-up that the `pick <original-merge>` syntax would pose a problem, but for different reasons: We already tried it, with --preserve-merges, and it is just a really stupid syntax that does not allow the user even to reorder commits. Or drop commits (except at the very end of the todo list). As to your concern: The ultimate commit hashes do not have to be known until the merge commit is rebased. The current approach is to use labels for them (`label <name>`), which Simply Works. Ciao, Dscho
