Eric Sunshine <sunshine@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> On Mon, Aug 6, 2018 at 9:20 PM Hilco Wijbenga <hilco.wijbenga@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> But your suggestion did make me think about what behaviour I would
>> like to see, exactly. I like that Git removes commits that no longer
>> serve any purpose (because I've included their changes in earlier
>> commits). So I would not want to keep commits that become empty during
>> the rebase. What I would like to see is that commits that _start out_
>> as empty, are retained. Would such behaviour make sense? Or would that
>> be considered surprising behaviour?
>
> I, personally, have no opinion since I don't use empty commits.
> Perhaps someone more experienced and more long-sighted will chime in.
0661e49a ("git-rebase.txt: document behavioral differences between
modes", 2018-06-27) added the following. In short, "rebase -i"
should already behave that way.
+ * empty commits:
+
+ am-based rebase will drop any "empty" commits, whether the
+ commit started empty (had no changes relative to its parent to
+ start with) or ended empty (all changes were already applied
+ upstream in other commits).
+
+ merge-based rebase does the same.
+
+ interactive-based rebase will by default drop commits that
+ started empty and halt if it hits a commit that ended up empty.
+ The `--keep-empty` option exists for interactive rebases to allow
+ it to keep commits that started empty.
