Request for rebaseif extension to be provided by default with rebase

Sébastien Deleuze seb at
Sat Jun 18 09:13:26 CDT 2011

Thanks for this feedback, I think I understand my mistake now and the
misconceptions there is on this subject.

That woudl mean that the only way to acheive the "pull + push with a linear
history when I have local commits" is only possible in Mercurial with a
"safe rebase". Sad news for me !

The fast forward functionnality is more related to the other issues I
reported with bookmarks in the Mercurial workflow thread ...

On Sat, Jun 18, 2011 at 3:38 PM, Benoit Boissinot <bboissin at>wrote:

> On Sat, Jun 18, 2011 at 3:25 PM, Sébastien Deleuze <seb at> wrote:
> >
> > In Mercurial, The fast forward merge could be done on "hg pull --ff" in
> case
> > we have local commit not pushed to the local repo. It would just update
> the
> > parent of the local commits to the freashly pulled one, avoiding an
> > unecessary anonymous head when we just pull to update the local repo.
> fast-forward is only meaningful for git or hg with bookmarks (it's a
> "pointers/bookmarks" operation, not an operation on the history).
> The case you describe would *not* be a fast-forward with git, if you
> have divergent commits you cannot fast forward.
> I really wish people would not say fast-forward merge (since it's not
> a merge), but fast-forward update.
> Benoit
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the Mercurial mailing list