From: Johannes Sixt <j6t@kdbg.org>
To: Martin von Zweigbergk <martinvonz@gmail.com>
Cc: git <git@vger.kernel.org>, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>,
Chris Webb <chris@arachsys.com>,
Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/7] add tests for rebasing with patch-equivalence present
Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 14:54:20 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <51A74BFC.4020900@kdbg.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CANiSa6joMXeh7HoGAFXskdXaPZjN+0uHrtN7V85FyQHTGCwZMQ@mail.gmail.com>
Am 30.05.2013 07:30, schrieb Martin von Zweigbergk:
> On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 12:09 AM, Johannes Sixt <j.sixt@viscovery.net> wrote:
>> Am 5/29/2013 8:39, schrieb Martin von Zweigbergk:
>>> +# f
>>> +# /
>>> +# a---b---c---g---h
>>> +# \
>>> +# d---G---i
>> ...
>>> +test_run_rebase () {
>>> + result=$1
>>> + shift
>>> + test_expect_$result "rebase $* --onto drops patches in onto" "
>>> + reset_rebase &&
>>> + git rebase $* --onto h f i &&
>>> + test_cmp_rev h HEAD~2 &&
>>> + test_linear_range 'd i' h..
>>
>> Isn't this expectation wrong? The upstream of the rebased branch is f, and
>> it does not contain G. Hence, G should be replayed. Since h is the
>> reversal of g, the state at h is the same as at c, and applying G should
>> succeed (it is the same change as g). Therefore, I think the correct
>> expectation is:
>>
>> test_linear_range 'd G i' h..
>
> Good question! It is really not obvious what the right answer is. Some
> arguments in favor of dropping 'G':
>
> 1. Let's say origin/master points to 'b' when you start the 'd G i'
> branch. You then send the 'G' patch to Junio who applies it as 'g'
> (cherry-picking direction is reversed compared to figure, but same
> effect). You then "git pull --rebase" when master on origin points to
> 'h'. Because of the cleverness in 'git pull --rebase', it issues 'git
> rebase --onto h b i'.
The reason for this git pull cleverness is to be prepared for rewritten
history:
b'--c'--g'--h'
/
a---b
\
d---G---i
to avoid that b is rebased.
> In this case it's clearly useful to have the
> patch dropped.
>
> 2. In the test a little before the above one, we instead do 'git
> rebase --onto f h i' and make sure that the 'G' is _not_ lost. In that
> case it doesn't matter what's in $branch..$upstream. Do we agree that
> $branch..$upstream should never matter (instead, $upstream is only
> used to find merge base with $branch)?
No, we do not agree. $branch..$upstream should be the set of patches
that should be omitted. $branch..$onto should not matter. $onto is only
used to specify the destination of the rebased commits.
> Do we also agree that 'git
> rebase a b' should be identical to 'git rebase --onto a a b'?
Absolutely!
> Because
> 'git rebase h i' should clearly drop 'G', then so should 'git rebase
> --onto h h i'.
Yes!
> Then, if we agreed that $branch..$upstream doesn't
> matter, 'git rebase --onto h f i' should behave the same, no?
Correct in the mathematically logical sense. ;) But we do not agree that
$branch..$upstream doesn't matter.
> The set of commits to rebase that I was thinking of using was
> "$upstream..$branch, unless equivalent with patch in $branch..$onto".
> But I'm not very confident about my conclusions above :-)
At least the man page says that ..$upstream counts and $onto tells just
the new base.
The way how git pull calls rebase should be revisited, I think.
-- Hannes
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-05-30 12:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 75+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-09-18 6:31 [RFC PATCH] add t3420-rebase-topology Martin von Zweigbergk
2012-09-18 7:51 ` Junio C Hamano
2012-09-21 17:06 ` Martin von Zweigbergk
2012-09-18 7:53 ` Johannes Sixt
2012-09-26 17:07 ` Martin von Zweigbergk
2012-09-27 12:20 ` Chris Webb
2012-09-28 18:03 ` Martin von Zweigbergk
2012-09-29 8:08 ` Chris Webb
2013-05-29 6:39 ` [PATCH v2 0/7] Rebase topology test Martin von Zweigbergk
2013-05-29 6:39 ` [PATCH v2 1/7] add simple tests of consistency across rebase types Martin von Zweigbergk
2013-06-03 17:16 ` Martin von Zweigbergk
2013-06-03 18:05 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-06-03 18:12 ` Martin von Zweigbergk
2013-05-29 6:39 ` [PATCH v2 2/7] add tests for rebasing with patch-equivalence present Martin von Zweigbergk
2013-05-29 7:09 ` Johannes Sixt
2013-05-30 5:30 ` Martin von Zweigbergk
2013-05-30 5:41 ` Felipe Contreras
2013-05-30 6:14 ` Martin von Zweigbergk
2013-05-30 6:40 ` Felipe Contreras
2013-05-30 6:46 ` Martin von Zweigbergk
2013-05-30 12:54 ` Johannes Sixt [this message]
2013-05-30 15:01 ` Martin von Zweigbergk
2013-05-29 6:39 ` [PATCH v2 3/7] add tests for rebasing of empty commits Martin von Zweigbergk
2013-05-29 6:39 ` [PATCH v2 4/7] add tests for rebasing root Martin von Zweigbergk
2013-05-29 7:31 ` Johannes Sixt
2013-05-30 5:51 ` Martin von Zweigbergk
2013-05-29 6:39 ` [PATCH v2 5/7] add tests for rebasing merged history Martin von Zweigbergk
2013-05-29 7:57 ` Johannes Sixt
2013-05-31 5:42 ` Martin von Zweigbergk
2013-05-29 10:33 ` Johannes Sixt
2013-05-29 6:39 ` [PATCH v2 6/7] t3406: modernize style Martin von Zweigbergk
2013-05-29 6:39 ` [PATCH v2 7/7] tests: move test for rebase messages from t3400 to t3406 Martin von Zweigbergk
2013-05-29 7:10 ` [PATCH v2 0/7] Rebase topology test Felipe Contreras
2013-05-29 12:50 ` Ramkumar Ramachandra
2013-05-29 13:54 ` Felipe Contreras
2013-05-31 6:49 ` [PATCH v3 " Martin von Zweigbergk
2013-05-31 6:49 ` [PATCH v3 1/7] add simple tests of consistency across rebase types Martin von Zweigbergk
2013-05-31 6:49 ` [PATCH v3 2/7] add tests for rebasing with patch-equivalence present Martin von Zweigbergk
2013-05-31 6:49 ` [PATCH v3 3/7] add tests for rebasing of empty commits Martin von Zweigbergk
2013-05-31 6:49 ` [PATCH v3 4/7] add tests for rebasing root Martin von Zweigbergk
2013-05-31 6:49 ` [PATCH v3 5/7] add tests for rebasing merged history Martin von Zweigbergk
2013-05-31 12:19 ` Johannes Sixt
2013-06-01 21:36 ` [PATCH v4 " Martin von Zweigbergk
2013-05-31 6:49 ` [PATCH v3 6/7] t3406: modernize style Martin von Zweigbergk
2013-05-31 6:49 ` [PATCH v3 7/7] tests: move test for rebase messages from t3400 to t3406 Martin von Zweigbergk
2013-06-03 20:42 ` [PATCH v5 0/7] Rebase topology test Martin von Zweigbergk
2013-06-03 20:42 ` [PATCH v5 1/7] add simple tests of consistency across rebase types Martin von Zweigbergk
2013-06-03 22:28 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-06-04 5:14 ` Martin von Zweigbergk
2013-06-04 5:49 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-06-04 6:15 ` Johannes Sixt
2013-06-05 4:31 ` Martin von Zweigbergk
2013-06-03 20:42 ` [PATCH v5 2/7] add tests for rebasing with patch-equivalence present Martin von Zweigbergk
2013-06-03 20:42 ` [PATCH v5 3/7] add tests for rebasing of empty commits Martin von Zweigbergk
2013-06-03 20:42 ` [PATCH v5 4/7] add tests for rebasing root Martin von Zweigbergk
2013-06-03 20:42 ` [PATCH v5 5/7] add tests for rebasing merged history Martin von Zweigbergk
2013-06-04 17:18 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-06-05 5:44 ` Martin von Zweigbergk
2013-06-05 6:12 ` Johannes Sixt
2013-06-03 20:42 ` [PATCH v5 6/7] t3406: modernize style Martin von Zweigbergk
2013-06-03 20:42 ` [PATCH v5 7/7] tests: move test for rebase messages from t3400 to t3406 Martin von Zweigbergk
2013-06-07 6:11 ` [PATCH v6 0/8] Rebase topology test Martin von Zweigbergk
2013-06-07 6:11 ` [PATCH v6 1/7] add simple tests of consistency across rebase types Martin von Zweigbergk
2013-06-07 6:11 ` [PATCH v6 2/7] add tests for rebasing with patch-equivalence present Martin von Zweigbergk
2013-06-07 6:11 ` [PATCH v6 3/7] add tests for rebasing of empty commits Martin von Zweigbergk
2013-06-07 6:11 ` [PATCH v6 4/7] add tests for rebasing root Martin von Zweigbergk
2013-06-07 6:11 ` [PATCH v6 5/7] add tests for rebasing merged history Martin von Zweigbergk
2013-06-07 6:11 ` [PATCH v6 6/7] t3406: modernize style Martin von Zweigbergk
2013-06-07 6:11 ` [PATCH v6 7/7] tests: move test for rebase messages from t3400 to t3406 Martin von Zweigbergk
2013-06-07 16:43 ` [PATCH v6 0/8] Rebase topology test Junio C Hamano
2013-06-07 19:37 ` Johannes Sixt
2013-06-18 7:28 ` [PATCH mz/rebase-tests] rebase topology tests: fix commit names on case-insensitive file systems Johannes Sixt
2013-06-18 15:45 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-06-18 15:53 ` Martin von Zweigbergk
2013-06-19 5:52 ` Johannes Sixt
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=51A74BFC.4020900@kdbg.org \
--to=j6t@kdbg.org \
--cc=chris@arachsys.com \
--cc=felipe.contreras@gmail.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=martinvonz@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).