> -----Original Message----- > From: Philip Oakley <philipoakley@xxxxxxx> > Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2019 5:34 PM > To: LU Chuck <Chuck.LU@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Johannes Sixt <j6t@xxxxxxxx> > Cc: git@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; chuck.lu@xxxxxx > Subject: Re: git filter-branch re-write history over a range of commits did notwork > > Hi Chuck, > > On 28/05/2019 08:10, LU Chuck wrote: > [snip] > >> Copying and pasting examples literally is dangerous. You should know > >> what you are doing. > >> > >> "..." is a revision range that computes the mergebase between HEAD > >> and HEAD, which is (surprise!) HEAD, and then includes the two end > >> points, but excludes everything below the mergebase. So, the revision > >> specification that your command ends up with is > >> > >> HEAD HEAD ^HEAD ^67d9d9 f70bf4 > >> > >> Which is empty if f70bf4 is an ancestor of HEAD. > > [LU Chuck] Sorry, I can't understand this part, did you have an documentation > about the explanation for ...? > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__git-2Dscm.com_docs_git > revisions-23Documentation_gitrevisions.txt-2DTheem82308203emthree-2DdotS > ymmetricDifferenceNotation&d=DwICaQ&c=O17m6UdqOAIZh9XQ8pTl4g&r=VcG > eIeOZ_8_zlrQNSboenYltfxGNIXN_qG6VpZgXVRk&m=_rDozHXubCFkEsfhMr2QlaP > n-h_Khfqa3RG0cNmrSxo&s=qdyaJNy6nkAe-4ufeS4o1NdvgoqQQhZDmDjmjQK9k > Ro&e= [LU Chuck] Thanks for your documentation about the explanation. Previously I read another documentation https://git-scm.com/book/en/v2/Git-Tools-Revision-Selection#Commit-Ranges. It's weird the three dots has two different explanation, maybe there should a place to collect these two explanation for three dots. > > "computes the mergebase between HEAD and HEAD" I have no idea > about this. And you also talked about mergebase, but in my situation, there is only > one branch with 5 commits. I did not have a mergebase. > > You can check the detail description below. > When there is no specific revisions around the three dots then HEAD is assumed > (to save typing) [LU Chuck] I got you here, that's why you ask me remove the three dots before, right? > > [snipping the comments on the alternate script]
