Phillip Wood [off-list ref] writes:
It could be expensive to check that the local modifications will not
interfere with the rebase - wouldn't it have to look at all the files
touched by each commit before starting? What do cherry-pick and am do
here when picking several commits?
Yes, so?
"I do not think of a way to implement it cheaply, so we forbid
anybody from finding a clever optimization to implement it cheaply
by adding a feature that will not work well with it when it
happens?"
On 24/08/17 17:46, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Phillip Wood [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
It could be expensive to check that the local modifications will not
interfere with the rebase - wouldn't it have to look at all the files
touched by each commit before starting? What do cherry-pick and am do
here when picking several commits?
Yes, so?
"I do not think of a way to implement it cheaply, so we forbid
anybody from finding a clever optimization to implement it cheaply
by adding a feature that will not work well with it when it
happens?"
Ouch, I think that is a rather unfair characterization of what I said
and certainly does not reflect what I was trying to say. I was asking
since cherry-pick and am can pick/apply multiple commits/patches and
apparently allow the user to start with a dirty tree what do they do
about checking that the applied commits/patches do not interfere with
any local changes. As for "adding a feature that will not work well with
it when it happens?" I suggested a possible solution in the message.
Anyway you're not convinced this feature is a good idea and no one else
has commented so I'll drop it.
Phil