3 ms·
The problem is that if you rebase branch1 based on feedback, your branch2 now has a dangling source commit. So you need rebase-fu to fix, and it’s per-stacked-b
by theptip 3y ago
The problem is that if you rebase branch1 based on feedback, your branch2 now has a dangling source commit. So you need rebase-fu to fix, and it’s per-stacked-branch. Even with rerere the merges can be annoying.
The tooling in Phab (and Graphite) makes stacks much easier to work with by auto-rebasing the whole stack as you push new changes to base commits.
- OJFord 3y agoAh ok, fair enough. I can certainly appreciate that would be helpful, because yeah the 'annoying rebase-fu' is how I do that. TFA seems to get hung up on reviewing individual commits instead of a set of them ('a diff is basically a commit' - err well yes) when actually the benefit per my guesswork and your description is more about the automation, and there's no inherent reason (as far as we've discussed anyway) that it couldn't be doing that with a set of multiple commits anyway.
- Liskni_si 3y ago> So you need rebase-fu to fix, and it’s per-stacked-branch. Note that `git rebase --update-refs` lets you just rebase the last branch and the entire stack gets updated. You just need to know which branches to forcepush.