NAME
----
-git-rebase - Forward-port local commits to the updated upstream head
+git-rebase - Reapply commits on top of another base tip
SYNOPSIS
--------
[verse]
-'git rebase' [-i | --interactive] [options] [--exec <cmd>] [--onto <newbase>]
- [<upstream> [<branch>]]
-'git rebase' [-i | --interactive] [options] [--exec <cmd>] [--onto <newbase>]
+'git rebase' [-i | --interactive] [<options>] [--exec <cmd>]
+ [--onto <newbase> | --keep-base] [<upstream> [<branch>]]
+'git rebase' [-i | --interactive] [<options>] [--exec <cmd>] [--onto <newbase>]
--root [<branch>]
-'git rebase' --continue | --skip | --abort | --edit-todo
+'git rebase' (--continue | --skip | --abort | --quit | --edit-todo | --show-current-patch)
DESCRIPTION
-----------
If <branch> is specified, 'git rebase' will perform an automatic
-`git checkout <branch>` before doing anything else. Otherwise
+`git switch <branch>` before doing anything else. Otherwise
it remains on the current branch.
If <upstream> is not specified, the upstream configured in
If the upstream branch already contains a change you have made (e.g.,
because you mailed a patch which was applied upstream), then that commit
will be skipped. For example, running `git rebase master` on the
-following history (in which A' and A introduce the same set of changes,
+following history (in which `A'` and `A` introduce the same set of changes,
but have different committer information):
------------
CONFIGURATION
-------------
-rebase.stat::
- Whether to show a diffstat of what changed upstream since the last
- rebase. False by default.
-
-rebase.autosquash::
- If set to true enable '--autosquash' option by default.
-
-rebase.autostash::
- If set to true enable '--autostash' option by default.
+include::config/rebase.txt[]
OPTIONS
-------
merge base of A and B if there is exactly one merge base. You can
leave out at most one of A and B, in which case it defaults to HEAD.
+--keep-base::
+ Set the starting point at which to create the new commits to the
+ merge base of <upstream> <branch>. Running
+ 'git rebase --keep-base <upstream> <branch>' is equivalent to
+ running 'git rebase --onto <upstream>... <upstream>'.
++
+This option is useful in the case where one is developing a feature on
+top of an upstream branch. While the feature is being worked on, the
+upstream branch may advance and it may not be the best idea to keep
+rebasing on top of the upstream but to keep the base commit as-is.
++
+Although both this option and --fork-point find the merge base between
+<upstream> and <branch>, this option uses the merge base as the _starting
+point_ on which new commits will be created, whereas --fork-point uses
+the merge base to determine the _set of commits_ which will be rebased.
++
+See also INCOMPATIBLE OPTIONS below.
+
<upstream>::
Upstream branch to compare against. May be any valid commit,
not just an existing branch name. Defaults to the configured
will be reset to where it was when the rebase operation was
started.
+--quit::
+ Abort the rebase operation but HEAD is not reset back to the
+ original branch. The index and working tree are also left
+ unchanged as a result. If a temporary stash entry was created
+ using --autostash, it will be saved to the stash list.
+
+--apply::
+ Use applying strategies to rebase (calling `git-am`
+ internally). This option may become a no-op in the future
+ once the merge backend handles everything the apply one does.
++
+See also INCOMPATIBLE OPTIONS below.
+
+--empty={drop,keep,ask}::
+ How to handle commits that are not empty to start and are not
+ clean cherry-picks of any upstream commit, but which become
+ empty after rebasing (because they contain a subset of already
+ upstream changes). With drop (the default), commits that
+ become empty are dropped. With keep, such commits are kept.
+ With ask (implied by --interactive), the rebase will halt when
+ an empty commit is applied allowing you to choose whether to
+ drop it, edit files more, or just commit the empty changes.
+ Other options, like --exec, will use the default of drop unless
+ -i/--interactive is explicitly specified.
++
+Note that commits which start empty are kept (unless --no-keep-empty
+is specified), and commits which are clean cherry-picks (as determined
+by `git log --cherry-mark ...`) are detected and dropped as a
+preliminary step (unless --reapply-cherry-picks is passed).
++
+See also INCOMPATIBLE OPTIONS below.
+
+--no-keep-empty::
--keep-empty::
- Keep the commits that do not change anything from its
- parents in the result.
+ Do not keep commits that start empty before the rebase
+ (i.e. that do not change anything from its parent) in the
+ result. The default is to keep commits which start empty,
+ since creating such commits requires passing the --allow-empty
+ override flag to `git commit`, signifying that a user is very
+ intentionally creating such a commit and thus wants to keep
+ it.
++
+Usage of this flag will probably be rare, since you can get rid of
+commits that start empty by just firing up an interactive rebase and
+removing the lines corresponding to the commits you don't want. This
+flag exists as a convenient shortcut, such as for cases where external
+tools generate many empty commits and you want them all removed.
++
+For commits which do not start empty but become empty after rebasing,
+see the --empty flag.
++
+See also INCOMPATIBLE OPTIONS below.
+
+--reapply-cherry-picks::
+--no-reapply-cherry-picks::
+ Reapply all clean cherry-picks of any upstream commit instead
+ of preemptively dropping them. (If these commits then become
+ empty after rebasing, because they contain a subset of already
+ upstream changes, the behavior towards them is controlled by
+ the `--empty` flag.)
++
+By default (or if `--no-reapply-cherry-picks` is given), these commits
+will be automatically dropped. Because this necessitates reading all
+upstream commits, this can be expensive in repos with a large number
+of upstream commits that need to be read.
++
+`--reapply-cherry-picks` allows rebase to forgo reading all upstream
+commits, potentially improving performance.
++
+See also INCOMPATIBLE OPTIONS below.
+
+--allow-empty-message::
+ No-op. Rebasing commits with an empty message used to fail
+ and this option would override that behavior, allowing commits
+ with empty messages to be rebased. Now commits with an empty
+ message do not cause rebasing to halt.
++
+See also INCOMPATIBLE OPTIONS below.
--skip::
Restart the rebasing process by skipping the current patch.
--edit-todo::
Edit the todo list during an interactive rebase.
+--show-current-patch::
+ Show the current patch in an interactive rebase or when rebase
+ is stopped because of conflicts. This is the equivalent of
+ `git show REBASE_HEAD`.
+
-m::
--merge::
Use merging strategies to rebase. When the recursive (default) merge
strategy is used, this allows rebase to be aware of renames on the
- upstream side.
+ upstream side. This is the default.
+
Note that a rebase merge works by replaying each commit from the working
branch on top of the <upstream> branch. Because of this, when a merge
conflict happens, the side reported as 'ours' is the so-far rebased
series, starting with <upstream>, and 'theirs' is the working branch. In
other words, the sides are swapped.
++
+See also INCOMPATIBLE OPTIONS below.
-s <strategy>::
--strategy=<strategy>::
+
Because 'git rebase' replays each commit from the working branch
on top of the <upstream> branch using the given strategy, using
-the 'ours' strategy simply discards all patches from the <branch>,
+the 'ours' strategy simply empties all patches from the <branch>,
which makes little sense.
++
+See also INCOMPATIBLE OPTIONS below.
-X <strategy-option>::
--strategy-option=<strategy-option>::
This implies `--merge` and, if no strategy has been
specified, `-s recursive`. Note the reversal of 'ours' and
'theirs' as noted above for the `-m` option.
++
+See also INCOMPATIBLE OPTIONS below.
+
+--rerere-autoupdate::
+--no-rerere-autoupdate::
+ Allow the rerere mechanism to update the index with the
+ result of auto-conflict resolution if possible.
-S[<keyid>]::
--gpg-sign[=<keyid>]::
- GPG-sign commits.
+--no-gpg-sign::
+ GPG-sign commits. The `keyid` argument is optional and
+ defaults to the committer identity; if specified, it must be
+ stuck to the option without a space. `--no-gpg-sign` is useful to
+ countermand both `commit.gpgSign` configuration variable, and
+ earlier `--gpg-sign`.
-q::
--quiet::
Ensure at least <n> lines of surrounding context match before
and after each change. When fewer lines of surrounding
context exist they all must match. By default no context is
- ever ignored.
+ ever ignored. Implies --apply.
++
+See also INCOMPATIBLE OPTIONS below.
--f::
+--no-ff::
--force-rebase::
- Force a rebase even if the current branch is up-to-date and
- the command without `--force` would return without doing anything.
+-f::
+ Individually replay all rebased commits instead of fast-forwarding
+ over the unchanged ones. This ensures that the entire history of
+ the rebased branch is composed of new commits.
+
-You may find this (or --no-ff with an interactive rebase) helpful after
-reverting a topic branch merge, as this option recreates the topic branch with
-fresh commits so it can be remerged successfully without needing to "revert
-the reversion" (see the
-link:howto/revert-a-faulty-merge.html[revert-a-faulty-merge How-To] for details).
+You may find this helpful after reverting a topic branch merge, as this option
+recreates the topic branch with fresh commits so it can be remerged
+successfully without needing to "revert the reversion" (see the
+link:howto/revert-a-faulty-merge.html[revert-a-faulty-merge How-To] for
+details).
--fork-point::
--no-fork-point::
<branch>` command (see linkgit:git-merge-base[1]). If 'fork_point'
ends up being empty, the <upstream> will be used as a fallback.
+
-If either <upstream> or --root is given on the command line, then the
-default is `--no-fork-point`, otherwise the default is `--fork-point`.
+If <upstream> is given on the command line, then the default is
+`--no-fork-point`, otherwise the default is `--fork-point`.
++
+If your branch was based on <upstream> but <upstream> was rewound and
+your branch contains commits which were dropped, this option can be used
+with `--keep-base` in order to drop those commits from your branch.
++
+See also INCOMPATIBLE OPTIONS below.
--ignore-whitespace::
--whitespace=<option>::
- These flag are passed to the 'git apply' program
+ These flags are passed to the 'git apply' program
(see linkgit:git-apply[1]) that applies the patch.
- Incompatible with the --interactive option.
+ Implies --apply.
++
+See also INCOMPATIBLE OPTIONS below.
--committer-date-is-author-date::
--ignore-date::
These flags are passed to 'git am' to easily change the dates
of the rebased commits (see linkgit:git-am[1]).
- Incompatible with the --interactive option.
++
+See also INCOMPATIBLE OPTIONS below.
+
+--signoff::
+ Add a Signed-off-by: trailer to all the rebased commits. Note
+ that if `--interactive` is given then only commits marked to be
+ picked, edited or reworded will have the trailer added.
++
+See also INCOMPATIBLE OPTIONS below.
-i::
--interactive::
Make a list of the commits which are about to be rebased. Let the
user edit that list before rebasing. This mode can also be used to
split commits (see SPLITTING COMMITS below).
++
+The commit list format can be changed by setting the configuration option
+rebase.instructionFormat. A customized instruction format will automatically
+have the long commit hash prepended to the format.
++
+See also INCOMPATIBLE OPTIONS below.
+
+-r::
+--rebase-merges[=(rebase-cousins|no-rebase-cousins)]::
+ By default, a rebase will simply drop merge commits from the todo
+ list, and put the rebased commits into a single, linear branch.
+ With `--rebase-merges`, the rebase will instead try to preserve
+ the branching structure within the commits that are to be rebased,
+ by recreating the merge commits. Any resolved merge conflicts or
+ manual amendments in these merge commits will have to be
+ resolved/re-applied manually.
++
+By default, or when `no-rebase-cousins` was specified, commits which do not
+have `<upstream>` as direct ancestor will keep their original branch point,
+i.e. commits that would be excluded by linkgit:git-log[1]'s
+`--ancestry-path` option will keep their original ancestry by default. If
+the `rebase-cousins` mode is turned on, such commits are instead rebased
+onto `<upstream>` (or `<onto>`, if specified).
++
+The `--rebase-merges` mode is similar in spirit to the deprecated
+`--preserve-merges` but works with interactive rebases,
+where commits can be reordered, inserted and dropped at will.
++
+It is currently only possible to recreate the merge commits using the
+`recursive` merge strategy; Different merge strategies can be used only via
+explicit `exec git merge -s <strategy> [...]` commands.
++
+See also REBASING MERGES and INCOMPATIBLE OPTIONS below.
-p::
--preserve-merges::
- Recreate merge commits instead of flattening the history by replaying
- commits a merge commit introduces. Merge conflict resolutions or manual
- amendments to merge commits are not preserved.
+ [DEPRECATED: use `--rebase-merges` instead] Recreate merge commits
+ instead of flattening the history by replaying commits a merge commit
+ introduces. Merge conflict resolutions or manual amendments to merge
+ commits are not preserved.
+
This uses the `--interactive` machinery internally, but combining it
with the `--interactive` option explicitly is generally not a good
idea unless you know what you are doing (see BUGS below).
++
+See also INCOMPATIBLE OPTIONS below.
-x <cmd>::
--exec <cmd>::
Append "exec <cmd>" after each line creating a commit in the
final history. <cmd> will be interpreted as one or more shell
- commands.
-+
-This option can only be used with the `--interactive` option
-(see INTERACTIVE MODE below).
+ commands. Any command that fails will interrupt the rebase,
+ with exit code 1.
+
You may execute several commands by either using one instance of `--exec`
with several commands:
If `--autosquash` is used, "exec" lines will not be appended for
the intermediate commits, and will only appear at the end of each
squash/fixup series.
++
+This uses the `--interactive` machinery internally, but it can be run
+without an explicit `--interactive`.
++
+See also INCOMPATIBLE OPTIONS below.
--root::
Rebase all commits reachable from <branch>, instead of
When used together with both --onto and --preserve-merges,
'all' root commits will be rewritten to have <newbase> as parent
instead.
++
+See also INCOMPATIBLE OPTIONS below.
--autosquash::
--no-autosquash::
When the commit log message begins with "squash! ..." (or
- "fixup! ..."), and there is a commit whose title begins with
- the same ..., automatically modify the todo list of rebase -i
- so that the commit marked for squashing comes right after the
- commit to be modified, and change the action of the moved
- commit from `pick` to `squash` (or `fixup`). Ignores subsequent
- "fixup! " or "squash! " after the first, in case you referred to an
- earlier fixup/squash with `git commit --fixup/--squash`.
-+
-This option is only valid when the '--interactive' option is used.
-+
-If the '--autosquash' option is enabled by default using the
-configuration variable `rebase.autosquash`, this option can be
+ "fixup! ..."), and there is already a commit in the todo list that
+ matches the same `...`, automatically modify the todo list of rebase
+ -i so that the commit marked for squashing comes right after the
+ commit to be modified, and change the action of the moved commit
+ from `pick` to `squash` (or `fixup`). A commit matches the `...` if
+ the commit subject matches, or if the `...` refers to the commit's
+ hash. As a fall-back, partial matches of the commit subject work,
+ too. The recommended way to create fixup/squash commits is by using
+ the `--fixup`/`--squash` options of linkgit:git-commit[1].
++
+If the `--autosquash` option is enabled by default using the
+configuration variable `rebase.autoSquash`, this option can be
used to override and disable this setting.
++
+See also INCOMPATIBLE OPTIONS below.
---[no-]autostash::
- Automatically create a temporary stash before the operation
+--autostash::
+--no-autostash::
+ Automatically create a temporary stash entry before the operation
begins, and apply it after the operation ends. This means
that you can run rebase on a dirty worktree. However, use
with care: the final stash application after a successful
rebase might result in non-trivial conflicts.
---no-ff::
- With --interactive, cherry-pick all rebased commits instead of
- fast-forwarding over the unchanged ones. This ensures that the
- entire history of the rebased branch is composed of new commits.
-+
-Without --interactive, this is a synonym for --force-rebase.
-+
-You may find this helpful after reverting a topic branch merge, as this option
-recreates the topic branch with fresh commits so it can be remerged
-successfully without needing to "revert the reversion" (see the
-link:howto/revert-a-faulty-merge.html[revert-a-faulty-merge How-To] for details).
+--reschedule-failed-exec::
+--no-reschedule-failed-exec::
+ Automatically reschedule `exec` commands that failed. This only makes
+ sense in interactive mode (or when an `--exec` option was provided).
+
+INCOMPATIBLE OPTIONS
+--------------------
+
+The following options:
+
+ * --apply
+ * --committer-date-is-author-date
+ * --ignore-date
+ * --ignore-whitespace
+ * --whitespace
+ * -C
+
+are incompatible with the following options:
+
+ * --merge
+ * --strategy
+ * --strategy-option
+ * --allow-empty-message
+ * --[no-]autosquash
+ * --rebase-merges
+ * --preserve-merges
+ * --interactive
+ * --exec
+ * --no-keep-empty
+ * --empty=
+ * --reapply-cherry-picks
+ * --edit-todo
+ * --root when used in combination with --onto
+
+In addition, the following pairs of options are incompatible:
+
+ * --preserve-merges and --interactive
+ * --preserve-merges and --signoff
+ * --preserve-merges and --rebase-merges
+ * --preserve-merges and --empty=
+ * --keep-base and --onto
+ * --keep-base and --root
+ * --fork-point and --root
+
+BEHAVIORAL DIFFERENCES
+-----------------------
+
+git rebase has two primary backends: apply and merge. (The apply
+backend used to be known as the 'am' backend, but the name led to
+confusion as it looks like a verb instead of a noun. Also, the merge
+backend used to be known as the interactive backend, but it is now
+used for non-interactive cases as well. Both were renamed based on
+lower-level functionality that underpinned each.) There are some
+subtle differences in how these two backends behave:
+
+Empty commits
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~
+
+The apply backend unfortunately drops intentionally empty commits, i.e.
+commits that started empty, though these are rare in practice. It
+also drops commits that become empty and has no option for controlling
+this behavior.
+
+The merge backend keeps intentionally empty commits by default (though
+with -i they are marked as empty in the todo list editor, or they can
+be dropped automatically with --no-keep-empty).
+
+Similar to the apply backend, by default the merge backend drops
+commits that become empty unless -i/--interactive is specified (in
+which case it stops and asks the user what to do). The merge backend
+also has an --empty={drop,keep,ask} option for changing the behavior
+of handling commits that become empty.
+
+Directory rename detection
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
+
+Due to the lack of accurate tree information (arising from
+constructing fake ancestors with the limited information available in
+patches), directory rename detection is disabled in the apply backend.
+Disabled directory rename detection means that if one side of history
+renames a directory and the other adds new files to the old directory,
+then the new files will be left behind in the old directory without
+any warning at the time of rebasing that you may want to move these
+files into the new directory.
+
+Directory rename detection works with the merge backend to provide you
+warnings in such cases.
+
+Context
+~~~~~~~
+
+The apply backend works by creating a sequence of patches (by calling
+`format-patch` internally), and then applying the patches in sequence
+(calling `am` internally). Patches are composed of multiple hunks,
+each with line numbers, a context region, and the actual changes. The
+line numbers have to be taken with some fuzz, since the other side
+will likely have inserted or deleted lines earlier in the file. The
+context region is meant to help find how to adjust the line numbers in
+order to apply the changes to the right lines. However, if multiple
+areas of the code have the same surrounding lines of context, the
+wrong one can be picked. There are real-world cases where this has
+caused commits to be reapplied incorrectly with no conflicts reported.
+Setting diff.context to a larger value may prevent such types of
+problems, but increases the chance of spurious conflicts (since it
+will require more lines of matching context to apply).
+
+The merge backend works with a full copy of each relevant file,
+insulating it from these types of problems.
+
+Labelling of conflicts markers
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
+
+When there are content conflicts, the merge machinery tries to
+annotate each side's conflict markers with the commits where the
+content came from. Since the apply backend drops the original
+information about the rebased commits and their parents (and instead
+generates new fake commits based off limited information in the
+generated patches), those commits cannot be identified; instead it has
+to fall back to a commit summary. Also, when merge.conflictStyle is
+set to diff3, the apply backend will use "constructed merge base" to
+label the content from the merge base, and thus provide no information
+about the merge base commit whatsoever.
+
+The merge backend works with the full commits on both sides of history
+and thus has no such limitations.
+
+Hooks
+~~~~~
+
+The apply backend has not traditionally called the post-commit hook,
+while the merge backend has. Both have called the post-checkout hook,
+though the merge backend has squelched its output. Further, both
+backends only call the post-checkout hook with the starting point
+commit of the rebase, not the intermediate commits nor the final
+commit. In each case, the calling of these hooks was by accident of
+implementation rather than by design (both backends were originally
+implemented as shell scripts and happened to invoke other commands
+like 'git checkout' or 'git commit' that would call the hooks). Both
+backends should have the same behavior, though it is not entirely
+clear which, if any, is correct. We will likely make rebase stop
+calling either of these hooks in the future.
+
+Interruptability
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
+
+The apply backend has safety problems with an ill-timed interrupt; if
+the user presses Ctrl-C at the wrong time to try to abort the rebase,
+the rebase can enter a state where it cannot be aborted with a
+subsequent `git rebase --abort`. The merge backend does not appear to
+suffer from the same shortcoming. (See
+https://lore.kernel.org/git/20200207132152.GC2868@szeder.dev/ for
+details.)
+
+Commit Rewording
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
+
+When a conflict occurs while rebasing, rebase stops and asks the user
+to resolve. Since the user may need to make notable changes while
+resolving conflicts, after conflicts are resolved and the user has run
+`git rebase --continue`, the rebase should open an editor and ask the
+user to update the commit message. The merge backend does this, while
+the apply backend blindly applies the original commit message.
+
+Miscellaneous differences
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
+
+There are a few more behavioral differences that most folks would
+probably consider inconsequential but which are mentioned for
+completeness:
+
+* Reflog: The two backends will use different wording when describing
+ the changes made in the reflog, though both will make use of the
+ word "rebase".
+
+* Progress, informational, and error messages: The two backends
+ provide slightly different progress and informational messages.
+ Also, the apply backend writes error messages (such as "Your files
+ would be overwritten...") to stdout, while the merge backend writes
+ them to stderr.
+
+* State directories: The two backends keep their state in different
+ directories under .git/
include::merge-strategies.txt[]
the files and/or the commit message, amend the commit, and continue
rebasing.
+To interrupt the rebase (just like an "edit" command would do, but without
+cherry-picking any commit first), use the "break" command.
+
If you just want to edit the commit message for a commit, replace the
command "pick" with the command "reword".
+To drop a commit, replace the command "pick" with "drop", or just
+delete the matching line.
+
If you want to fold two or more commits into one, replace the command
"pick" for the second and subsequent commits with "squash" or "fixup".
If the commits had different authors, the folded commit will be
And move the first patch to the end of the list.
-You might want to preserve merges, if you have a history like this:
+You might want to recreate merge commits, e.g. if you have a history
+like this:
------------------
X
sure that the current HEAD is "B", and call
-----------------------------
-$ git rebase -i -p --onto Q O
+$ git rebase -i -r --onto Q O
-----------------------------
Reordering and editing commits usually creates untested intermediate
following:
------------
- o---o---o---o---o---o---o---o---o master
+ o---o---o---o---o---o---o---o master
\
o---o---o---o---o subsystem
\
This happens if the 'subsystem' rebase had conflicts, or used
`--interactive` to omit, edit, squash, or fixup commits; or
if the upstream used one of `commit --amend`, `reset`, or
- `filter-branch`.
+ a full history rewriting command like
+ https://github.com/newren/git-filter-repo[`filter-repo`].
The easy case
'subsystem' did.
In that case, the fix is easy because 'git rebase' knows to skip
-changes that are already present in the new upstream. So if you say
+changes that are already present in the new upstream (unless
+`--reapply-cherry-picks` is given). So if you say
(assuming you're on 'topic')
------------
$ git rebase subsystem
--interactive` will be **resurrected**!
The idea is to manually tell 'git rebase' "where the old 'subsystem'
-ended and your 'topic' began", that is, what the old merge-base
+ended and your 'topic' began", that is, what the old merge base
between them was. You will have to find a way to name the last commit
of the old 'subsystem', for example:
'everyone' downstream from 'topic' will now have to perform a "hard
case" recovery too!
+REBASING MERGES
+---------------
+
+The interactive rebase command was originally designed to handle
+individual patch series. As such, it makes sense to exclude merge
+commits from the todo list, as the developer may have merged the
+then-current `master` while working on the branch, only to rebase
+all the commits onto `master` eventually (skipping the merge
+commits).
+
+However, there are legitimate reasons why a developer may want to
+recreate merge commits: to keep the branch structure (or "commit
+topology") when working on multiple, inter-related branches.
+
+In the following example, the developer works on a topic branch that
+refactors the way buttons are defined, and on another topic branch
+that uses that refactoring to implement a "Report a bug" button. The
+output of `git log --graph --format=%s -5` may look like this:
+
+------------
+* Merge branch 'report-a-bug'
+|\
+| * Add the feedback button
+* | Merge branch 'refactor-button'
+|\ \
+| |/
+| * Use the Button class for all buttons
+| * Extract a generic Button class from the DownloadButton one
+------------
+
+The developer might want to rebase those commits to a newer `master`
+while keeping the branch topology, for example when the first topic
+branch is expected to be integrated into `master` much earlier than the
+second one, say, to resolve merge conflicts with changes to the
+DownloadButton class that made it into `master`.
+
+This rebase can be performed using the `--rebase-merges` option.
+It will generate a todo list looking like this:
+
+------------
+label onto
+
+# Branch: refactor-button
+reset onto
+pick 123456 Extract a generic Button class from the DownloadButton one
+pick 654321 Use the Button class for all buttons
+label refactor-button
+
+# Branch: report-a-bug
+reset refactor-button # Use the Button class for all buttons
+pick abcdef Add the feedback button
+label report-a-bug
+
+reset onto
+merge -C a1b2c3 refactor-button # Merge 'refactor-button'
+merge -C 6f5e4d report-a-bug # Merge 'report-a-bug'
+------------
+
+In contrast to a regular interactive rebase, there are `label`, `reset`
+and `merge` commands in addition to `pick` ones.
+
+The `label` command associates a label with the current HEAD when that
+command is executed. These labels are created as worktree-local refs
+(`refs/rewritten/<label>`) that will be deleted when the rebase
+finishes. That way, rebase operations in multiple worktrees linked to
+the same repository do not interfere with one another. If the `label`
+command fails, it is rescheduled immediately, with a helpful message how
+to proceed.
+
+The `reset` command resets the HEAD, index and worktree to the specified
+revision. It is similar to an `exec git reset --hard <label>`, but
+refuses to overwrite untracked files. If the `reset` command fails, it is
+rescheduled immediately, with a helpful message how to edit the todo list
+(this typically happens when a `reset` command was inserted into the todo
+list manually and contains a typo).
+
+The `merge` command will merge the specified revision(s) into whatever
+is HEAD at that time. With `-C <original-commit>`, the commit message of
+the specified merge commit will be used. When the `-C` is changed to
+a lower-case `-c`, the message will be opened in an editor after a
+successful merge so that the user can edit the message.
+
+If a `merge` command fails for any reason other than merge conflicts (i.e.
+when the merge operation did not even start), it is rescheduled immediately.
+
+At this time, the `merge` command will *always* use the `recursive`
+merge strategy for regular merges, and `octopus` for octopus merges,
+with no way to choose a different one. To work around
+this, an `exec` command can be used to call `git merge` explicitly,
+using the fact that the labels are worktree-local refs (the ref
+`refs/rewritten/onto` would correspond to the label `onto`, for example).
+
+Note: the first command (`label onto`) labels the revision onto which
+the commits are rebased; The name `onto` is just a convention, as a nod
+to the `--onto` option.
+
+It is also possible to introduce completely new merge commits from scratch
+by adding a command of the form `merge <merge-head>`. This form will
+generate a tentative commit message and always open an editor to let the
+user edit it. This can be useful e.g. when a topic branch turns out to
+address more than a single concern and wants to be split into two or
+even more topic branches. Consider this todo list:
+
+------------
+pick 192837 Switch from GNU Makefiles to CMake
+pick 5a6c7e Document the switch to CMake
+pick 918273 Fix detection of OpenSSL in CMake
+pick afbecd http: add support for TLS v1.3
+pick fdbaec Fix detection of cURL in CMake on Windows
+------------
+
+The one commit in this list that is not related to CMake may very well
+have been motivated by working on fixing all those bugs introduced by
+switching to CMake, but it addresses a different concern. To split this
+branch into two topic branches, the todo list could be edited like this:
+
+------------
+label onto
+
+pick afbecd http: add support for TLS v1.3
+label tlsv1.3
+
+reset onto
+pick 192837 Switch from GNU Makefiles to CMake
+pick 918273 Fix detection of OpenSSL in CMake
+pick fdbaec Fix detection of cURL in CMake on Windows
+pick 5a6c7e Document the switch to CMake
+label cmake
+
+reset onto
+merge tlsv1.3
+merge cmake
+------------
+
BUGS
----
-The todo list presented by `--preserve-merges --interactive` does not
-represent the topology of the revision graph. Editing commits and
-rewording their commit messages should work fine, but attempts to
-reorder commits tend to produce counterintuitive results.
+The todo list presented by the deprecated `--preserve-merges --interactive`
+does not represent the topology of the revision graph (use `--rebase-merges`
+instead). Editing commits and rewording their commit messages should work
+fine, but attempts to reorder commits tend to produce counterintuitive results.
+Use `--rebase-merges` in such scenarios instead.
For example, an attempt to rearrange
------------
projects / platform / upstream / git.git / blobdiff