How about a single branch mode?

[tkellogg]

How about a single branch mode?

[tkellogg]

I wonder if we could have 2 parents for every commit — the base commit + the dura branch. The history could get very messy to look at though. It's worth a try.

If you want to try it out, it's a matter of adding &head to this list (and change the branch name of course)

[tkellogg]

would #59 do what you want? if it's implemented

[nskazki]

Hey! The idea is great. The tool definitely needs this subcommand. Especially when it comes to rebasing because with the rewritten history it might be very hard to figure out the dura branch to check on.

As for my problem. The subcommand won't solve it, unfortunately, because there still will be hundreds of dura branches in the git branch output. However, I don't know a way to keep diffs readable with a single branch where every commit is disconnected from others. So, I don't mind shelving the idea of a single branch mode.

[tkellogg]

Yeah, I can't see dura doing single branch mode natively, it's too invasive. I want to focus on other ways of managing branches.

We could publish dura on crates.io so that someone else can tinker with the idea of single branch mode without having to rewrite dura. Is that interesting to you?

[nskazki]

Okay. Thank again for creating the tool. I believe it has lots of potentials, keep on going 👍

As for working on a fork, no, I won't commit. Although, thanks for asking!