From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Missing changes in merges from emacs-25 to master Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2016 14:41:53 -0400 Message-ID: References: <56EE8B27.3090208@gmx.at> <83d1qp6on1.fsf@gnu.org> <56EEEE19.4000800@gmx.at> <8360wh6l1a.fsf@gnu.org> <56EEF6DA.3050104@gmx.at> <56EFA47D.8020303@cs.ucla.edu> <83zitr6civ.fsf@gnu.org> <83lh5b66jj.fsf@gnu.org> <8360wf5gmz.fsf@gnu.org> <83wpou4hb4.fsf@gnu.org> <83poum4g1y.fsf@gnu.org> <83oaa64f7l.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1458672153 32122 80.91.229.3 (22 Mar 2016 18:42:33 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2016 18:42:33 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Mar 22 19:42:25 2016 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 1aiRG0-00053r-A0 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 22 Mar 2016 19:42:20 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:38949 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aiRFz-00067P-T4 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 22 Mar 2016 14:42:19 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:51033) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aiRFg-00063r-F8 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 22 Mar 2016 14:42:01 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aiRFf-0005gm-KN for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 22 Mar 2016 14:42:00 -0400 Original-Received: from ironport2-out.teksavvy.com ([206.248.154.181]:60524) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aiRFa-0005gR-1I; Tue, 22 Mar 2016 14:41:54 -0400 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0A+FgA731xV/5a2xEVcgxCEAoVVwwsEAgKBPD0QAQEBAQEBAYEKQQWDXQEBAwFWIwULCzQSFBgNJIg3CM8jAQEBAQYCAR+LOoUFB4QtBbM/gUUjhBQigngBAQE X-IPAS-Result: A0A+FgA731xV/5a2xEVcgxCEAoVVwwsEAgKBPD0QAQEBAQEBAYEKQQWDXQEBAwFWIwULCzQSFBgNJIg3CM8jAQEBAQYCAR+LOoUFB4QtBbM/gUUjhBQigngBAQE X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.13,465,1427774400"; d="scan'208";a="197787104" Original-Received: from 69-196-182-150.dsl.teksavvy.com (HELO pastel.home) ([69.196.182.150]) by ironport2-out.teksavvy.com with ESMTP; 22 Mar 2016 14:41:53 -0400 Original-Received: by pastel.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id 2616363F25; Tue, 22 Mar 2016 14:41:53 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <83oaa64f7l.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Tue, 22 Mar 2016 19:03:58 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.1.50 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 206.248.154.181 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:202091 Archived-At: > We've been through this: "git rebase" will cause much worse trouble if > you have local merge-commits from feature branches. Indeed. The problem is very real when you want to do "git merge; git push" and the merge is non-trivial, since you have to hurry to fix the merge problems before someone else. > So I at least will never use "git rebase" unless I have no > other choice. I do use "git rebase" when none of the local commits are merges. When there's a merge, the only option I know of is to checkout "master", then do a "git merge {localbranch}; git push". I really think there should be a way to tell git to "merge in the other direction", but Git people don't seem to listen. > When we started using Git, I explicitly asked whether we cared about > the messed-up DAG due to these merge-commits, and the answer was "we > don't". So I never looked back, and I guess others didn't, too. What can I say, you were right. I'm not really bothered by the shape of the DAG itself, but the commit-diffs are pretty annoying and there are a few other linked problems such as the one discussed in this thread. Stefan