Hi Philippe, On Mon, Jul 13, 2020 at 10:44:06PM -0400, Philippe Blain wrote: > Hello, > > I learned today that doing `git rebase --keep-base master` > will drop commits that were cherry-picked from master to the current branch. > I was simply doing a code clean up on my feature branch (the full command was > `git rebase -i --keep-base master`), and this kind of confused me for a moment. Glad I'm not the only one using this feature :) > Is this a sane default ? I understand that it is a good default when we are rebasing > *on top* of master, but here I'm just doing some squashing and fixup's and I did not > want the commit I had cherry-picked from master to disappear (yet). In fact, because it > was dropped, it created a modify/delete conflict because in a subsequent commit > in my feature branch I'm modifying files that are added in the commit I cherry-picked. So if I'm not mistaken, if we have the following graph A - B - C - D (master) \ - C' - D (feature) and we do `git rebase --keep-base master` from feature, C' will be dropped? Indeed, I am surprised by how this interacts with the default setting of --reapply-cherry-picks. > How would a change that made '--reapply-cherry-picks' be the default when using 'keep-base' > be received ? I'm somewhat surprised that --no-reapply-cherry-picks is the default. I would argue that it _shouldn't_ be the default at all. It's an optimisation for when no --onto or --keep-base are specified but it definitely can cause problems otherwise, as we've seen. I think I would argue for the following in decreasing order of preference: 1. Make --no-reapply-cherry-picks the default in all cases. (Those who need the optimisation can enable it manually and we can add a configuration option for it.) 2. Make --no-reapply-cherry-picks only active if no --onto or --keep-base are given (--keep-base is a special case of --onto so we only have to handle it in one place). > Tangential question: in any case, would it make sense to still add the "dropped because > already upstream" commits to the todo list, in the case of an interactive rebase ? > (maybe commented out, or listed as 'drop' with some kind of comment saying those > are dropped because they appear textually upstream?) That would make sense to me. I don't have a preference between either. Thanks, Denton > Cheers, > Philippe. > P.S. I CC'd those who were involved with the 'keep-base' patch or the 'reapply-cherry-picks' patch.
