On Sun, Dec 30, 2012 at 02:05:38PM -0600, Nico Williams wrote: > I repeat: git rebase does not "manipulate the pre-existing tree", it > does not destroy any history already in the tree. The only > destructive action that git rebase does is change the commit that a > branch _name_ points to, and from a fossil philosophy perspective this > is the only aspect of git rebase that is worth differing on.
git rebase is destructive due to a combination of not supporting more than one "leave" revision for a given named tag and dropping all other revisions on a non-fastforward push. Now a combination of recording what a "rebase" is based on and just marking the original commit as closed would pretty much serve the purpose of fossil. Joerg _______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
