3 ms·
I don't think there is a precise rule. because the exact meaning depends on the context. In part 3 of the series, in the section about "branches are fictitious
by mjd 4y ago
I don't think there is a precise rule. because the exact meaning depends on the context. In part 3 of the series, in the section about "branches are fictitious", that's what I will say.
The talk has an abbreviated version: https://perl.plover.com/classes/git-tips/samples/slide018.html https://perl.plover.com/classes/git-tips/samples/slide018.ht... It's an illustration of just one example of this: If we rebase "branch X" onto commit B, we rebase only the three green commits. But if we rebase it onto C, we consider X to contain the two dark blue commits also.
Are the dark blue commits part of branch X? It depends on what you're trying to communicate.
- layer8 4y agoRight, and that’s what makes “branch” a vague notion in git. It’s not clear what exactly is meant with “branch x” when it’s not just about the labeled tip, and often enough no further clarification is given.