Hi
On Mon, Apr 17, 2023, at 10:21, Stefan Haller wrote:
> 2. I have a topic branch, and I want to make a copy of it to make some
> heavy history rewriting experiments. Again, my interactive rebases would
> always rebase both branches in the same way, not what I want. In this
> case I could work around it by doing the experiments on the original
> branch, creating a tag beforehand that I could reset back to if the
> experiments fail. But maybe I do want to keep both branches around for a
> while for some reason.
I would use a lightweight tag, too, since this option doesn’t touch tags.[1]
Why do you want to keep both branches around? I would keep the tag
around and then branch off of that if I want to make another divergent
history in the future.
This is interesting to me since copying branches indeed does not seem to
*gel* with this git-rebase(1) option. But I never really understood the
use-case for copying branches rather than using lightweight tags.
† 1: I wonder why it wasn’t called `--update-branches`. On the one hand,
the option ignores refs other than branches. On the other hand, the
command in the todo list *will* update tags if you tell it to, and
even refs like `/refs/notes/*`. But `--update-branches` seems like a
better name, at least outside the todo editor.
--
Kristoffer Haugsbakk
