From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Messing with the VC history Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2014 20:13:02 +0200 Message-ID: <83sihjc8up.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87k32vsm8u.fsf@wanadoo.es> <87ppcnk16n.fsf@Rainer.invalid> <83egt3dv5k.fsf@gnu.org> <877fyvjear.fsf@Rainer.invalid> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1416161622 23456 80.91.229.3 (16 Nov 2014 18:13:42 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2014 18:13:42 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Achim Gratz Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Nov 16 19:13:34 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Xq4KK-00006j-BD for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 16 Nov 2014 19:13:32 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:44680 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Xq4KJ-0006ZP-TM for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 16 Nov 2014 13:13:31 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:40051) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Xq4KA-0006To-QU for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 16 Nov 2014 13:13:28 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Xq4K4-0000T0-1D for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 16 Nov 2014 13:13:22 -0500 Original-Received: from mtaout22.012.net.il ([80.179.55.172]:55460) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Xq4K3-0000Se-PO for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 16 Nov 2014 13:13:15 -0500 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout22.012.net.il by a-mtaout22.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0NF5000008YLIF00@a-mtaout22.012.net.il> for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 16 Nov 2014 20:13:14 +0200 (IST) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([87.69.4.28]) by a-mtaout22.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0NF50007T9A1HI20@a-mtaout22.012.net.il>; Sun, 16 Nov 2014 20:13:14 +0200 (IST) In-reply-to: <877fyvjear.fsf@Rainer.invalid> X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Solaris 10 X-Received-From: 80.179.55.172 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:177336 Archived-At: > From: Achim Gratz > Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2014 17:33:32 +0100 > > > What about "pull --rebase=preserve"? It sounds like a less radical > > option, did I miss something? > > For the usual "let's fix this thing and get it upstream" type of > work it shouldn't matter. Otherwise you'll have to remember to > configure your feature branches differently if they contain merges > (local merges that is, because merges with upstream wouldn't enter > into the branch if you rebase by default). Sorry, I'm not sure I follow: the pull.rebase = preserve setting is only for the "pull" command, right? It doesn't affect "merge" and commands that invoke "merge", like "cherry-pick", right? If so, why would I need to configure my feature branches differently, if I don't intend to pull into them from upstream? My workflow with feature branches is create the branch; do the work; when it's almost done, merge from master and test; then merge back into master and push. There's no pulling here except from upstream to master. > For longer term work that's kept in feature branches I prefer to > rebase on top of upstream rather than merge and usually do a full > rewrite before pushing it upstream as well. Well, I prefer merging instead, see above.