From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.5 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id D40CE1F404 for ; Mon, 16 Apr 2018 22:30:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751205AbeDPWaX (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Apr 2018 18:30:23 -0400 Received: from mail-io0-f171.google.com ([209.85.223.171]:37905 "EHLO mail-io0-f171.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750917AbeDPWaX (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Apr 2018 18:30:23 -0400 Received: by mail-io0-f171.google.com with SMTP id h9so6436840iob.5 for ; Mon, 16 Apr 2018 15:30:22 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=SWi2+gtXyUu0Qk48xsW7kBBmzxVY9AHHMdR3rMgXdiQ=; b=d8ea9Q/mngkg1vvSozrsU17qMGgkjoE2wvXXoTO+jbxEfKesnZmHk24N705wp5rx5R M573vn7Kj/fCUk/qMSIWaipT8YUuf68h2eu55KkjcE7vEU6ajeXD+OJGX/yc3Xq4dFxb o6wCGmrfM/4wjZygPVHcNuUQBa7TkgIiFBfmJhzJOTvHOq9BBlTVo1WBSpdZc2Abnv9/ gQsy9AhHchjo6bUCjjqiZ0cklLj84BeEIWlMlcNw1fE3zMIpK5rp7+gMKeNKVq+MODi7 xoGJj6qRIRztiHPMgdvDiEiAAkcCt5Kn4Kb7a3kX1v1Hmg8xAx8+Ss0t0QWKMYfwgXv+ 5CrA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=SWi2+gtXyUu0Qk48xsW7kBBmzxVY9AHHMdR3rMgXdiQ=; b=Fk1wiho7HAqhr/a6716BQgFSDAW8xu2zkfzYvGQ05HwLDzfjiURv4v9kIy5k15nH+T QKlIja6yqZM632sH5t/QT985RisogrpFuG1iGmB5hSmRQdCt3aeeM+ym6QOY0R7IgsWT RGGqNpwGmHud+tZrXud1SdKFgoEog/9St1scbwmVB0A5KdeoUdifYwh6Wer65tug/gyw ckhXMEpvgtC2Ki50T6O6jhw5LC13Km+K89lQ6INeodi+yEXoPyA8u52+zAVOQTQ9RuyY A7kL0nj2CyBnmJeiEpz1EvViFSV3u+WTnCZmc/fJgcmE69BhyMV8mVQDhnZffSQv0sl/ CqcA== X-Gm-Message-State: ALQs6tB79z0s/b5WL3/f/XOIX5aCARpeXorrUPzAefOX/MoFdKwBM6GH PFH4s3zVyRIS9ZN4Ls4MfoD/tuE8jqwYa5jMbBA= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AIpwx4+UNk3f7cNygYk2Xmks1fb0vqU8zZCseCEs6uE7ZpJXLmOuXCL6f4NRrYCGUl3snsjTksQgJS0IrfJPZ/jrZ5U= X-Received: by 10.107.192.2 with SMTP id q2mr11953872iof.53.1523917822220; Mon, 16 Apr 2018 15:30:22 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.79.34.219 with HTTP; Mon, 16 Apr 2018 15:30:21 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <87efjf6uwg.fsf@javad.com> References: <87in8rz65t.fsf@javad.com> <87sh7v6vn4.fsf@javad.com> <72f42205-c9c6-03aa-e8df-12e7062e8e62@gmail.com> <87efjf6uwg.fsf@javad.com> From: Christian Couder Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2018 00:30:21 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Draft of Git Rev News edition 38 To: Sergey Organov Cc: Kaartic Sivaraam , git , Junio C Hamano , Jakub Narebski , Markus Jansen , Gabriel Alcaras , Jeff King , Johannes Schindelin , Jiang Xin , Jacob Keller , Eric Sunshine , Igor Djordjevic , Johannes Sixt , Phillip Wood , Phillip Wood Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 5:19 PM, Sergey Organov wrote: > Kaartic Sivaraam writes: > >> 1. I see the following sentence in the "Rebasing merges: a jorney to the >> ultimate solution (Road Clear) (written by Jacob Keller)" article >> >> "A few examples were tried, but it was proven that the original >> concept did not work, as dropped commits could end up being >> replaid into the merge commits, turning them into "evil" >> merges." >> >> I'm not sure if 'replaid' is proper English assuming the past tense of >> replay was intended there (which I think is 'replayed'). > > It could have meant, say, "reapplied", -- we need to ask the author. Yeah it could but I would say that it is not very likely compared to "replayed", so I changed it to "replayed". And yeah I can change it to something else if Jake (who is Cc'ed) prefers. > While we are at it, please also consider to replace "original concept" > by "original algorithm", as it didn't work due to a mistake in the > algorithm as opposed to failure of the concept itself. Ok, it's now "original algorithm". Thanks, Christian.