> You would expect the push to fail in the normal way, as if you had manually done the rebase, because your commit history may have diverged. That being said, I don't think this happens much in practice: the automatic rebases are typically for explicit history-rewriting operations that users tend to only do on their local work. If a user prefers to use a "no-rewriting" workflow, then they can certainly do so by simply not issuing the history-rewriting commands.
Yeah, most of those rebases happen in the working copy or inside the anonymous branch.
> I'm not sure what you mean by this. You can do `jj merge` in a similar way to `git merge`, or you can do a rebase workflow.
I just meant merging a feature branch back to its parent, jj merge exists but it's not obvious which revisions you are supposed to pass to it and jj log doesn't even seem to be able to update the HEAD for the parent branch. It should be an easy operation but it's not, clearly not the suggested workflow (or at least, not documented from what I've read).
Yeah, most of those rebases happen in the working copy or inside the anonymous branch.
> I'm not sure what you mean by this. You can do `jj merge` in a similar way to `git merge`, or you can do a rebase workflow.
I just meant merging a feature branch back to its parent, jj merge exists but it's not obvious which revisions you are supposed to pass to it and jj log doesn't even seem to be able to update the HEAD for the parent branch. It should be an easy operation but it's not, clearly not the suggested workflow (or at least, not documented from what I've read).