Re: stg pull/rebase

On 2008-06-11 18:00:25 +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote:

2008/6/11 Karl Hasselström [off-list ref]:

quoted

On 2008-06-10 16:43:27 +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote:

quoted

2008/6/10 Karl Hasselström [off-list ref]:

quoted

But what exactly is "rebasecmd" useful for, when you already
have "fetchcmd" and a built-in rebase?

In case the built-in rebase is not enough. Can you use "git svn
fetch" followed by plain "git rebase"? There are some comments
in git-svn.txt that recommend to use "git svn rebase" to
preserve linear history.

You most definitely can. I've been doing so daily for more than a
year:

 $ git svn fetch -q
 $ stg rebase -m svn/branch

Maybe, I haven't tried (I just followed the git-svn documentation).
Is the imported svn history linear?

Yes, it's linear. (Can git-svn do anything else?)

If it works, I no longer have a need for a rebasecmd option.

As I said, it works for me. And I can't really think of a case where
it wouldn't work. Try it and see!

quoted

And of course,

 stg rebase [committish]

   The same as "stg pull --no-fetch --rebase [committish]"; that
   is, no fetch, just rebase.

I'm OK, as long as we keep a "rebase" alias :-)

I guess you and Jakub have me cornered here. ;-)

quoted

quoted

See my interpretation of the word "pull". I can change my mind,
no problem, but it would be interesting to see what a native
English speaker says (though you are probably closer to English
than me :-)).

Mph, I don't know about me being "closer". I thought you were the
one living in the UK? ;-)

I was more thinking about the native language roots (Germanic vs
Latin in my case, I've only lived in the UK for 7 years) :-)

English is too far from Swedish in this case. My guideline in these
matters is my overconfidence in my own English skills. (And in this
particular case, having followed a mailing list where every month a
new unsuspecting user is taught that pull = fetch + merge.)

quoted

Regardless, I don't think we're actually in disagreement -- as I
understand it, we both think that pull = fetch + integrate. And
"rebase" is one possible value of "integrate".

I think the disagreement is that I consider "fetch" in the above
equality to be mandatory.

Well, I too consider "pull" to imply "fetch", so I don't see a
disagreement. I only called it "stg pull --no-fetch" instead of "stg
integrate" or whatever because (1) users will have an easier time
finding it that way, and (2) we have too many stg subcommands already.

But I think your proposal is OK.

Yay!

-- 
Karl Hasselström, kha@treskal.com
      www.treskal.com/kalle