[PATCH] rebase-i: keep old parents when preserving merges

This patch fixes two issues for rebase -i with preserving
merges of unrelated branches.

Merge parents that are part of an unrelated branch have not been
kept as a parent in some cases.
That means, a rewritten merge commit has either lost a parent
or rebase tried to cherry-pick this merge commit which resulted
in an error.

Signed-off-by: Stephan Beyer <redacted>
---
 git-rebase--interactive.sh |    2 ++
 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)

diff --git a/git-rebase--interactive.sh b/git-rebase--interactive.sh
index a35212d..0df7640 100755
--- a/git-rebase--interactive.sh
+++ b/git-rebase--interactive.sh

@@ -174,6 +174,8 @@ pick_one_preserving_merges () {
 				new_parents="$new_parents $new_p"
 				;;
 			esac
+		else
+			new_parents="$new_parents $p"
 		fi
 	done
 	case $fast_forward in

-- 
1.5.6.3.357.ge6ecd

I have to admit that the subject is pretty ambiguous.

Sorry :) I should go to bed.
  Stephan

-- 
Stephan Beyer [off-list ref], PGP 0x6EDDD207FCC5040F

Hi,

On Wed, 16 Jul 2008, Stephan Beyer wrote:

This patch fixes two issues for rebase -i with preserving
merges of unrelated branches.

Two?  What's the second?

Patch is obviously good.

Thanks,
Dscho

Hi,

Johannes Schindelin wrote:

Hi,

On Wed, 16 Jul 2008, Stephan Beyer wrote:

quoted

This patch fixes two issues for rebase -i with preserving
merges of unrelated branches.

Two?  What's the second?

Oh, eh, well ;)
It's only one bug, but it results in two different behaviors...
If you have a merge with more than two parents and not all are lost,
then it merges with too few parents.
If you have a merge with exactly two parents and one is lost, then
it tries to cherry-pick (with an error).
"Two" "issues" :)

Regards.
  Stephan

-- 
Stephan Beyer [off-list ref], PGP 0x6EDDD207FCC5040F

Hi,

On Wed, 16 Jul 2008, Stephan Beyer wrote:

Johannes Schindelin wrote:

quoted

On Wed, 16 Jul 2008, Stephan Beyer wrote:

quoted

This patch fixes two issues for rebase -i with preserving merges of 
unrelated branches.

Two?  What's the second?

Oh, eh, well ;)
It's only one bug, but it results in two different behaviors...

Ah, okay.  Worthwhile clarifying in the commit message.

Thanks for the patch,
Dscho