On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 01:49:34PM -0700, Jonathon Mah wrote: > During a few years of discussing git operations with colleagues, I’ve found > the “git rebase --onto” operation particularly ambiguous. The reason is that > I always describe a rebase operation as “onto” something else (because of the > English phrase “A is based on B”). For example: > > $ git rebase new-base # “Rebase HEAD onto new-base (from merge-base of HEAD > and new-base)" > $ git rebase new-base my-branch # “Rebase my-branch onto new-base (from > merge-base of my-branch and new-base)” > > Personally, I understand “git-rebase --onto new-base old-base” as meaning > “rebase from old-base to new-base”. Some prepositions that might make this > clearer: > > $ git rebase --from old-base new-base # “Rebase HEAD onto new-base, from > old-base" > $ git rebase --after old-base new-base # “Rebase commits on HEAD after > old-base HEAD onto new-base" > $ git rebase --excluding old-base new-base # “Rebase HEAD onto new-base, > excluding commit old-base (and its parents)" > > In all cases this would change the order of the arguments compared to --onto, > making it more consistent with the no-option rebase. > > What do others think? Is my view of “onto” common or unusual?
I have never liked the --onto syntax also. It's not only ugly but still fails to cover some needs. So in my, you know, clone of rebase I have made completely different syntax. You can take a look at it here: https://github.com/max630/git-rebase2/#usage I just copy the line here, without descriptions: git rebase2 [options] <dest> [[<source_from>]..[<through1>..<through2>]..[<source_to>]] [<target>] -- Max -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
