Re: [PATCH 0/1] Teach the builtin rebase about the builtin interactive rebase

Johannes Schindelin [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

Please include this information in the commit message.  It's super
helpful to find this kind of information about why a patch does what
it does when encountering a patch later "in the wild" (in git log -S
output).

I thought I did include the relevant part? As to the full back story: I
was repeatedly dressed down by Junio in recent attempts to include more
motivation in my commit messages. So I am reluctant to do as you say,
because Junio is the BDFL here.

I do recall discouraging you from including irrelevant rant/whine in
the log message a few times in the recent past, and also I do recall
you never listening to me.  Don't make me an excuse.

I think what Jonathan finds helpful is the other half of the story
of what you did write in [1/1].  You wrote that it is no longer a
shell script and needs to follow a separate calling convention.
What was missing from that description that was given in [0/1] is
why the original "rebase-in-c" series was done while pretending that
the other effort "rebase-i-in-c" did not even exist, which made it
necessary to do this change as a separate step.

And I tend to agree that it _is_ a relevant story in this case.