Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

feat/custom-post-rewrite-game-changer #10

Draft
wants to merge 34 commits into
base: feat/continue
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

kiprasmel
Copy link
Owner

No description provided.

@kiprasmel kiprasmel force-pushed the feat/custom-post-rewrite-game-changer branch from 260eb1b to 698f687 Compare April 11, 2022 02:51
@kiprasmel kiprasmel force-pushed the feat/custom-post-rewrite-game-changer branch from 698f687 to 6d6e29e Compare May 8, 2022 05:01
@kiprasmel kiprasmel force-pushed the feat/custom-post-rewrite-game-changer branch from 6d6e29e to f88d9f2 Compare May 8, 2022 07:49
@kiprasmel kiprasmel force-pushed the feat/custom-post-rewrite-game-changer branch from f88d9f2 to 2402919 Compare May 8, 2022 08:44
@kiprasmel kiprasmel force-pushed the feat/custom-post-rewrite-game-changer branch from 2402919 to 2516aac Compare May 8, 2022 09:01
@kiprasmel kiprasmel force-pushed the feat/custom-post-rewrite-game-changer branch from 2516aac to 3a6a223 Compare May 8, 2022 09:04
@kiprasmel kiprasmel force-pushed the feat/custom-post-rewrite-game-changer branch from 3a6a223 to a0e6fa2 Compare May 8, 2022 09:10
@kiprasmel kiprasmel force-pushed the feat/custom-post-rewrite-game-changer branch from a0e6fa2 to 3769010 Compare May 8, 2022 09:24
@kiprasmel kiprasmel force-pushed the feat/custom-post-rewrite-game-changer branch from 3769010 to d66583e Compare May 28, 2022 20:58
@kiprasmel kiprasmel force-pushed the feat/custom-post-rewrite-game-changer branch from d66583e to 23a135e Compare May 28, 2022 23:56
@kiprasmel kiprasmel force-pushed the feat/custom-post-rewrite-game-changer branch from 23a135e to e6b366a Compare June 7, 2022 02:50
Signed-off-by: Kipras Melnikovas <kipras@kipras.org>
Signed-off-by: Kipras Melnikovas <kipras@kipras.org>
… itself

Signed-off-by: Kipras Melnikovas <kipras@kipras.org>
…rging `amend`s & `rebase`s, figure out why fix is not sufficient for us yet

Signed-off-by: Kipras Melnikovas <kipras@kipras.org>
Signed-off-by: Kipras Melnikovas <kipras@kipras.org>
…ue all get reduced

Signed-off-by: Kipras Melnikovas <kipras@kipras.org>
Signed-off-by: Kipras Melnikovas <kipras@kipras.org>
Signed-off-by: Kipras Melnikovas <kipras@kipras.org>
Signed-off-by: Kipras Melnikovas <kipras@kipras.org>
Signed-off-by: Kipras Melnikovas <kipras@kipras.org>
Signed-off-by: Kipras Melnikovas <kipras@kipras.org>
Signed-off-by: Kipras Melnikovas <kipras@kipras.org>
Signed-off-by: Kipras Melnikovas <kipras@kipras.org>
…rk again! 🚀

Signed-off-by: Kipras Melnikovas <kipras@kipras.org>
…id instructions duplicating

Signed-off-by: Kipras Melnikovas <kipras@kipras.org>
…thing to apply (?)

Signed-off-by: Kipras Melnikovas <kipras@kipras.org>
… in "parseNewGoodCommands"

Signed-off-by: Kipras Melnikovas <kipras@kipras.org>
…es more sense

Signed-off-by: Kipras Melnikovas <kipras@kipras.org>
...because completely related to the logic of "doesNeedToApply",
"markThatNeedsToApply", "markThatApplied", etc.

thought about extracting the above utils into a separate, "rewrittenList.ts" file,
but it doesn't make sense to separate the utils out from "apply" itself,

because if we have the "rewrittenList.ts" file, then it'd sound
reasonable to move the "reduce-path"'s "combineRewrittenLists" there as well,
but it doesnt, because the apply logic is not related to the
parsing/combinning logic.

Signed-off-by: Kipras Melnikovas <kipras@kipras.org>
Signed-off-by: Kipras Melnikovas <kipras@kipras.org>
Signed-off-by: Kipras Melnikovas <kipras@kipras.org>
…o make work for push & others)

Signed-off-by: Kipras Melnikovas <kipras@kipras.org>
Signed-off-by: Kipras Melnikovas <kipras@kipras.org>
Signed-off-by: Kipras Melnikovas <kipras@kipras.org>
…nch & commit)

Signed-off-by: Kipras Melnikovas <kipras@kipras.org>
…ing only existing commits 🔥🔥🔥

Signed-off-by: Kipras Melnikovas <kipras@kipras.org>
…ur rebase

Signed-off-by: Kipras Melnikovas <kipras@kipras.org>
Signed-off-by: Kipras Melnikovas <kipras@kipras.org>
Signed-off-by: Kipras Melnikovas <kipras@kipras.org>
Signed-off-by: Kipras Melnikovas <kipras@kipras.org>
Signed-off-by: Kipras Melnikovas <kipras@kipras.org>
Signed-off-by: Kipras Melnikovas <kipras@kipras.org>
a) if the was only 1 rebase, nothing changes
b) in other cases i've encountered,
   using the last rebase always proved better
   than the 1st one:
     1st one would error oftenly; succeeded rarily
     last one would work just fine

but, there's still a lot of testing to do.
especially for >2 rebases, since i've only encountered 2.

it's a bit dangerous because if we pick the wrong rebase,
then we could lose commits / their content.

now, picking just 1 rebase is still incomplete --
this fix is just a (seemingly) better heuristic,

(!) but eventually we'll need to
take into account all of the rebases.

there might be ways to eliminate this need,
e.g. auto-calling `git-stacked-rebase --apply`
in the `post-rewrite` script in the background,
but at least for now, don't want to mess with it
and would prefer to avoid, until i have done
more dog-fooding & encounter more edge-cases
& maybe potential solutions/invariants as well.

Signed-off-by: Kipras Melnikovas <kipras@kipras.org>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant