Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@xxxxxxxxx> writes: >> What we want to see can be done without such backward incompatible >> changes, e.g. declaring the combination of "--ff-only" and >> "--[no-]rebase" incompatible and/or the last one wins, I would say, >> and I suspect Alex's RFC was an attempt to make the first step in >> that direction. > > It's debatable whether or not that is "backwards incompatible". > > Currently "--no-rebase --ff-only" fails if the merge is > non-fast-forward. With the proposed change of semantics it would work. > That's a change. But with such a change, "--ff-only --no-rebase" would work by ignoring the "I want to reject non-ff situation" request from the user, no? > Keep in mind the whole point of the changes: to make --ff-only the > default. Sorry, I know you keep repeating that "keep in mind", but I do not quite see why anybody needs to keep that in mind. Has a concensus that the repurposed --ff-only should be the default been established?
