rebase

问题 The rebase extension to mercurial provides functionality similar to git's rebase . Letting the rebase execute takes something like 4 minutes (~240 s) for 100 commits. In my imagination this should be extremely fast, a few seconds at most, but clearly I'm missing something. What makes it take so long? Are the commits themselves just extremely expensive? 回答1: By default, rebase writes to the working copy, but you can configure it to run in-memory for better performance, and to allow it to run

问题 So, yesterday I posted a question regarding some weird conflicts when I tried to rebase an upstream branch into my local topic branch. In the end I used git rebase --merge upstream and solved a lot of conflicts in files I haven't touched since the previous rebase. My understanding of rebase in such a case is that it detaches my commits from that topic branch, applies the commits from the upstream branch, and then applies (as patches) my commits on top of those. So, it ends up being a fast

问题 I'm in the middle of a large "rebase in progress" with numerous conflicts . I would like to set this progress aside and attempt to resolve this issue using another approach. Is there a way I can save an in-progress rebase such that I can finish it later? 回答1: If you're sitting at a conflicted merge as part of a rebase, you are kind of stuck. Here is why, how, and what you can do. Rebase = repeated cherry-pick Fundamentally, a rebase operation in Git is just a series of cherry-pick operations.

问题 I have 2 branches, master & feature . Master occasionally receives small tweaks that are needed to go live quickly. Once these tweaks are done, master is rebased into feature so that feature is kept up to date. The files changed on master are generally not related to the bulk of the development on feature but I've been getting a high number of complicated 3 way merge conflicts. After looking at the commit log of feature , I've found the problem to be several duplicates and I'm attempting to

问题 I'm struggling to find the mercurial workflow that fits the way that we work. I'm currently favouring a clone per feature but that is quite a change in mindset moving from Subversion. We'll also have issues with the current expense we have in setting up environments. Using hg pull --rebase seems to give us more of a Subversion-like workflow but from reading around I'm wary of using it. I think I understand the concepts and I can see that rewriting the history is not ideal but I can't seem to

问题 Say I have local branch A off of origin/master. I am continuously making changes to branch A, fetching the remote master, and rebasing. Then I have local branch B off of A. I am continuously making changes to branch B and rebasing. I am the only one working on branches A and B. Is this a bad setup since A's commit IDs (hashes) may be changing frequently? Does that destabilize branch B in any way or make conflicts more likely? In fact, how does Git even implement this setup? What is B's HEAD

问题 I converted a Subversion repository to Mercurial a few months back and I wound up leaving two meaningless gaps in my revision history. I'm trying to figure out if I can just splice over the gaps, but I haven't been able to get the tools to do precisely what I want. I had reorganized the Subversion repo twice in the early days of the project: first to convert a single project root to trunk/branches/tags layout, and then to add a second related project in a second root folder with it's own

问题 I am trying to squash a commit which is at HEAD into one that is a few back. When I run git rebase -i HEAD~7 , however, I am presented with just a noop in the editor! I am totally confused about how this is supposed to work. I am working in a branch ( cleanup ) that I created (using checkout -b cleanup ... on the SHA1 I found in reflog ) after I had my first rebase experience and I accidentally deleted all of those commits; point is, I am not sure what the branch's parent is (if that matters,

问题 We have a remote git repository where there are no size restrictions for files and we had pushed a 300MB into it. We then realized it and then removed the file from the repository. Meanwhile the same repository was added to github and when we try to push the changes to github, we get the large file size error. remote: error: File dir/filename is 312.27 MB; this exceeds GitHub's file size limit of 100 MB To fix this, I tried using the interactive git rebase solution suggested at How to remove

问题 We have a remote git repository where there are no size restrictions for files and we had pushed a 300MB into it. We then realized it and then removed the file from the repository. Meanwhile the same repository was added to github and when we try to push the changes to github, we get the large file size error. remote: error: File dir/filename is 312.27 MB; this exceeds GitHub's file size limit of 100 MB To fix this, I tried using the interactive git rebase solution suggested at How to remove