Git Mailing List Archive on
 help / color / Atom feed
From: Elijah Newren <>
To: Pavel Roskin <>
Cc: Git Mailing List <>,
	Phillip Wood <>,
	Johannes Schindelin <>,
	Junio C Hamano <>
Subject: Re: git-rebase produces incorrect output
Date: Sat, 30 Nov 2019 08:37:54 -0800
Message-ID: <> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <>

On Fri, Nov 29, 2019 at 8:22 PM Elijah Newren <> wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 29, 2019 at 12:24 AM Pavel Roskin <> wrote:

> So, to summarize here:
>   * you have a case where the default 3 lines of context mess stuff
> up; but rebase --merge works great
>   * am doesn't have a -U option, and ignores the diff.context setting,
> making it impossible to force the am backend to work on your case
>   * rebase doesn't have an option to use the merge/interactive backend
> by default (nor an --am option to override it)
> Also:
>   * The performance of the merge/interactive backend is slightly
> better than the am-backend
> (
> and will continue to get better
>   * The merge/interactive backend supports many more options than the
> am-backend, though the am one still has a few the merge backend
> doesn't.  Once the ra/rebase-i-more-options topic merges, --whitespace
> will be the only consequential option that the am-backend supports
> that the merge/interactive-backend doesn't.  (There's also -C, but as
> noted above, the merge/interactive backend already have access to the
> full file).

In case it wasn't clear above, the merge/interactive backend could
just accept the -C option and ignore it and do nothing, since it
already has access to the full file (thus why I consider the -C option
to not be consequential).

Also, I remembered and dug out a few more items about the default
rebase backend that might be worth including in this summary:
  * The am backend operates with incomplete tree information as well,
limiting what the merge/resolve/whatever can do and what information
can be provided to the user (see
  * The interactive backend, although slightly faster than the
am-backend (on p3400 at least), is slightly slower with split-index
which hasn't yet been investigated (see

> Maybe we should just switch the default, for everyone?  (And provide
> an --am option to override it and a config setting to get the old
> default?)

CC'ing a few folks for opinions on switching the default backend of
rebase from --am to --merge.  Johannes already agreed it was the right
path eventually[1], and Junio suggested the am backend should be
deprecated[2] and eventually replaced, so I was going to push on this
after some merge performance work but perhaps it's a good time to
query if it's time to switch the default sooner.

[1] See the end of,
also linked above.
also linked above.

  reply index

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-11-29  8:21 Pavel Roskin
2019-11-29 13:31 ` Philip Oakley
2019-11-29 21:28   ` Pavel Roskin
2019-11-30  4:22 ` Elijah Newren
2019-11-30 16:37   ` Elijah Newren [this message]
2019-11-30 17:58   ` Junio C Hamano

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:

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

Git Mailing List Archive on

Archives are clonable:
	git clone --mirror git/git/0.git

	# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
	# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
	public-inbox-init -V2 git git/ \
	public-inbox-index git

Example config snippet for mirrors

Newsgroup available over NNTP:

AGPL code for this site: git clone