Request for rebaseif extension to be provided by default with rebase

[Martin Geisler]

Sune Foldager <cryo at cyanite.org> writes:

> On 2011-05-24 13:31, Martin Geisler wrote:
>
>> Right, rebase does keep the original changesets around so that you
>> can abort it. But if the rebase is done, then there is no information
>> left in the graph about steps the user took to resolve conflicts, if
>> any. This is the information that Marcus would like to save.
>
> Right... it's just annoying when the conflict turns out to be trivial,
> as they often do, and then you're stuck with an extra merge-changeset
> which doesn't really clarify anything and just clutters :p.

Yeah, I would also always rebase single changesets like that.

But I don't think we should restrict the discussion to that special
case. Think of someone doing 3-5 changesets instead.

> What would be nice, maybe, is a way to back-convert a merge of a
> single changeset, into a rebase :). Of course with multiple
> changesets, this can't really be done, but the more changesets I have,
> the more I generally lean towards merging instead as well.

Converting an existing merge into a rebased changeset would be very
clever :)

-- 
Martin Geisler

aragost Trifork
Professional Mercurial support
http://mercurial.aragost.com/kick-start/