Re: git rebase --interactive commits order

The 11/05/11, Junio C Hamano wrote:

Richard Peterson [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 7:26 PM, Junio C Hamano [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

Devils lie in the details.  For example, should squash/fixup come before
or after the squashed commit when --reverse is in effect, and why?

Should "rebase --reverse --continue" work after it gets interrupted, if
not why not?

Yes, it should work,...

Of course, if you start with --reverse, it is clear and obvious that
'continue' should continue with the reversed instruction sheet, and it
probabaly should take --reverse as a no-op when given with --continue.
The original question should have been written more carefully to avoid
soliciting the response that addresses that uninteresting case.

I don't understand. Why not just _display_ the commit in reverse order?

Then, from the user POV commands like squash, fixup, etc would apply in
reverse order too (from up to down); keeping the mental model for "apply
against ancestor".

-- 
Nicolas Sebrecht