Junio C Hamano [off-list ref] writes:
Firmin Martin [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
quoted
True. But if we require confirmation before overwriting patches,
that would be overall worsening the end-user experience, I am
afraid. In a 5-patch series with a cover-letter that was formatted,
proofread, corrected with "rebase -i" and then re-formatted, unless
you rephrased the titles of the patches, you'd get prompted once for
the cover letter (which *IS* valuable) and five-times for patches
(which is annoying).
This is true for this patch, but the semantics changed after the patch
#3. I really should have squashed them together to not create
confusion. Sorry about that.
No, please keep them separate. What we can do to avoid confusion
like I showed is to make a note on the earlier one, saying "with
this the user experience looks like this, which may be suboptimal
for such and such reasons, but in a later step it will be improved
in this and that way".
Ok, it's noted.