from Hacker News

How to fork

by levlaz on 10/15/24, 1:57 AM with 23 comments

• by Ferret7446 on 10/15/24, 6:31 AM

  This doesn't seem to be about forking, but rather contributing upstream using a GitHub-like model.

  If you're actually forked, you shouldn't be rebasing.

• by hiddew on 10/15/24, 8:38 AM

  The post considers rebasing the fork. It seems easier to do only merges. You can merge specific upstream commits, or the entire upstream branch. That way you only need to merge in the changes, and not resolve the same conflicts for each downstream commit, every time the upstream is changed.

• by rahkiin on 10/15/24, 6:31 AM

  Nice overview. There is a lot of rebasing going on, and I wonder how that would work when more than one person works on the downstream fork. Force-pushing can easily break other users’ checkouts.

• by gcarvalho on 10/15/24, 6:35 AM

  Re: continuing a partial rebase

  I haven’t tried it myself, but since you know commits A and B have already been rebased and had their conflicts resolved, can’t you instead rebase -i on top of the partial-rebase branch and then drop A and B?

  I think this way at least you still benefit from the rebase --edit-todo, which you do not when cherry-picking C^..F.

• by mamcx on 10/15/24, 2:56 PM

  This will be easier with jujutsu(https://github.com/martinvonz/jj)?

• by matltc on 10/15/24, 4:00 PM

  What the fork is this guy on about?