Re: [PATCH v2 04/13] Teach rebase interactive the mark command

Hi,

On Wed, 30 Apr 2008, Junio C Hamano wrote:

Johannes Schindelin [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

quoted

But instead you are thinking of letting me just say "X", and somehow 
make the machinery guess by noticing "Ah, original X is a merge between 
original A and B, and we have a merge between rewritten A and rewritten 
B, so we will treat that merge as rewritten "X"?

I actually was hoping we could avoid that, which feels messy.

...
But this got me thinking, and I think that to leave out the first parent 
was another mistake I made, so I really would like to have this syntax:

	merge <orig-commit> <parent1> <parent2>... <message>

This would allow to change the parents in the interactive rebase, and if 
<parent1> is not the current commit at that point, it would implicitly 
call "reset".

What appeals to me is the simplicity of this approach: you refer to the 
commits by calling them by their (original) name.

Ok, that clears my confusion, but it raises another issue.

In the context of "rebase -i", this may not be a problem, but by forcing
us to name commits always with original commits, we cannot build (instead
of rebuild) a history that does not yet exist using the sequencer
machinery, can we?

The idea I hinted at was to refer to them by another name than the short 
name.  Then we can use the sequencer machinery.

I still maintain that it is such a rare need (even if you are a power user 
of it) that it makes sense to cater for other, simpler uses.

Ciao,
Dscho