On Fri, Jun 27, 2008 at 1:51 PM, David Jeske <jeske@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > -- Jakub Narebski wrote: >> git rebase --interactive? >> Any patch management interface (StGIT, Guilt)? > > Yes, as I said, that set of operations can be performed with git today. > > What git can't do, is let me "supercede" the old DAG-subset, so people I shared > them with can get my new changes without hurting their world. Currently git > seems to rely on the idea that "if you accept changes into your tree that will > be later rebased, it's up to you to figure it out". I don't see why that is the > case. Possibly a succinct way of moving this conversation forward is to say that: What is desired is a workflow where partial commits can be tested, when it is desirable not to change history. There are good reasons for desiring a workflow that does not routinely change history as part of the usual workflow. Maybe there are clones of your repo. Maybe as part of your workflow discipline you do not want HEAD states that cannot be pushed to public, because you don't want to manually keep track of when it is ok and when it is not ok to push HEAD to public, since git cannot tell you this. Thanks, Bob -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
