Alex Henrie [off-list ref] writes:

[...]

Let me ask a different but related question: If we add a
rebase-evil-merges mode, do you think that would be orthogonal to the
rebase-cousins mode?

This is the question that I considered as well. To me they look
orthogonal, and I'm afraid we will have hard times extending
--rebase-merges gracefully in a backward-compatible manner.

The set:

--rebase-merges=remerge
--rebase-merges=rebase
--rebase-merges=off

looks natural to me, but "cousins" that affect what is to be rebased (as
opposed to how, if at all), will apparently get in the way. Besides, I
recently ran into similar problem with --diff-merges (when|how)
dichotomy, and there was no elegant solution found, even though a
working one has been implemented, and then there were some discussions
around.

Also, I'm not quite sure that these "cousins" options make no sense when
we in fact flatten history (--no-rebase-merges case). To me it looks
like there should have been separate --[no-]rebase-cousins option,
provided we do need this choice in the first place, but I definitely
might be wrong here as well.

As a side note, it sounds both unfair and confusing to use
"rebase-evil-merges" term to describe a mode that will actually rebase
(all the) merges, as neither a merge needs to be 'evil' to be the object
of rebase operation, nor dedicated mode is necessarily needed to rebase
specifically 'evil' merges (whatever they actually are.)

Thanks,
-- Sergey Organov