Re: [PATCH v4 00/19] rebase: make the default backend configurable

2 messages, 2 authors, 2020-02-05 · open the first message on its own page

Re: [PATCH v4 00/19] rebase: make the default backend configurable

From: Junio C Hamano <hidden>
Date: 2020-02-05 21:07:06

Phillip Wood [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
Changes possibly missing from this version, for discussion:

  * I did not remove the --am option as suggested by Phillip, since Junio and
    Phillip were still discussing whether it is wanted/needed.
  * I did not address the last two items Jonathan brought up as I 
    couldn't find enough information to reproduce or understand the problems.
I think I've got a fix for the failure with
--committer-date-is-author-date that Jonathan reported which I'll post
next week - the bug was not in this series, it was just exposed by
it. I'll try and read through this series next week as well.

Best Wishes
Thanks.

As to the "--am" option, I do not care too deeply about it anymore,
so if there is nothing else that we need to further polish, should
we move this forward to 'next' soonish?

Re: [PATCH v4 00/19] rebase: make the default backend configurable

From: Elijah Newren <hidden>
Date: 2020-02-05 22:38:22

On Wed, Feb 5, 2020 at 1:07 PM Junio C Hamano [off-list ref] wrote:
Phillip Wood [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
quoted
Changes possibly missing from this version, for discussion:

  * I did not remove the --am option as suggested by Phillip, since Junio and
    Phillip were still discussing whether it is wanted/needed.
  * I did not address the last two items Jonathan brought up as I
    couldn't find enough information to reproduce or understand the problems.
I think I've got a fix for the failure with
--committer-date-is-author-date that Jonathan reported which I'll post
next week - the bug was not in this series, it was just exposed by
it. I'll try and read through this series next week as well.

Best Wishes
Thanks.

As to the "--am" option, I do not care too deeply about it anymore,
so if there is nothing else that we need to further polish, should
we move this forward to 'next' soonish?
I was hoping to hear back from Phillip, as he always provides great
comments.  I believe I've addressed all his comments up through v3,
but he hasn't had time in the last 2.5 weeks to review v4.

There was also an issue surrounding post-commit hooks that I think
Jonathan and/or Emily were looking in to.  I haven't heard from them
in a while, but I didn't think the issue was a blocker either.  If it
is, I can try to help push something along.

So, the current state is that there's nothing left for me to polish
that I know of.  If others know of things I've missed or want to
review v4 and point out changes I should make, I'm happy to make them.
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help