Re: Is rebase --force-rebase any different from rebase --no-ff?
- Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 11:21:53 -0700
- From: Stefan Beller <sbeller@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: Is rebase --force-rebase any different from rebase --no-ff?
+cc Marc and Johannes who know more about rebase.
On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 9:01 AM, Ilya Kantor <iliakan@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Right now in "git help rebase" for --no-ff:
> "Without --interactive, this is a synonym for --force-rebase."
> But *with* --interactive, is there any difference?
Teach rebase the --no-ff option.
For git-rebase.sh, --no-ff is a synonym for --force-rebase.
For git-rebase--interactive.sh, --no-ff cherry-picks all the commits in
the rebased branch, instead of fast-forwarding over any unchanged commits.
--no-ff offers an alternative way to deal with reverted merges. Instead of
"reverting the revert" you can use "rebase --no-ff" to recreate the branch
with entirely new commits (they're new because at the very least the
committer time is different). This obviates the need to revert the
reversion, as you can re-merge the new topic branch directly. Added an
addendum to revert-a-faulty-merge.txt describing the situation and how to
use --no-ff to handle it.
which sounds as if there is?