On Sun, Jul 12, 2015 at 10:02:15AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Sun, Jul 12, 2015 at 7:05 AM, Dirk Hohndel <d...@hohndel.org> wrote: > > > > Thanks for the explanation, Henrik. I read a bit through the git-rebase > > manpage and that has not necessarily completely enlightened me on the > > wisdom of this changes. > > I suspect it ends up working better in practice, although I do think > it has the chance of being really really horribly broken when you do a > non-fast-forward.
So I've tried this a few times now and it works fine in the simple cases and fails just as poorly as the non '--rebase' case in the more pathetic cases. So I think I'll take Henrik's change. > I dunno. The current situation isn't good either. The whole "base > things on a branch that does non-fast-forwards" model really is > entirely broken. Now that I completely agree with. It's just that I don't know how else to do it and keep the branches reasonably useful. I certainly don't do this with the "release branches", but with the daily moving branch... if I want to track upstream and keep our changes on top of upstream... how else would I do that? /D _______________________________________________ subsurface mailing list subsurface@subsurface-divelog.org http://lists.subsurface-divelog.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/subsurface