Re: Odd merge behaviour involving reverts

On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 11:01 PM, Linus Torvalds
[off-list ref] wrote:

Yes, it's more complex, and no, it's not always going to work (sometimes
the answer is: "oops, I really shouldn't have merged it, because it wasn't
ready yet, and I really need to undo _all_ of the merge"). So then you
really should revert the merge, but when you want to re-do the merge, you
now need to do it by reverting the revert.

Instead of reverting the revert, why not rebase the branch which was
merged to the point after the revert was done?

j.