From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS3215 2.6.0.0/16 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.2 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from out1.vger.email (out1.vger.email [IPv6:2620:137:e000::1:20]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id E3E471F4D7 for ; Fri, 3 Jun 2022 20:03:40 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: dcvr.yhbt.net; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=ttaylorr-com.20210112.gappssmtp.com header.i=@ttaylorr-com.20210112.gappssmtp.com header.b="7+2MLGG1"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S242830AbiFCUDa (ORCPT ); Fri, 3 Jun 2022 16:03:30 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:45430 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S235275AbiFCUD3 (ORCPT ); Fri, 3 Jun 2022 16:03:29 -0400 Received: from mail-qk1-x732.google.com (mail-qk1-x732.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::732]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 05E8F2872C for ; Fri, 3 Jun 2022 13:03:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qk1-x732.google.com with SMTP id a67so3077938qkc.3 for ; Fri, 03 Jun 2022 13:03:25 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ttaylorr-com.20210112.gappssmtp.com; s=20210112; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=jmlSP0CB0tCbaVrRwisdgzmfb50Y5HjTey98Ug/0wd8=; b=7+2MLGG1tYhwtmqY4CoiGKmeiz/hV6bW2ptW/wJcZQL2Xo8FAYn6ZpxGZwFILo75X8 pY6DpqUbUhoDT+hNU7wu8j2SIQSxZLL2Xt/WmntPB1ZXjl4ozcspAb05dCZgjDeBQBtm OuY+UEKaAhg/E7tBTcdU1A+6wyIynzGDAeHKk8HCclQVAxD86VcRyjpeT9OBjc3DYVdB t9f+6zWvg51qgQn205MoUIouIOHd/t6jWgDTrfGrgHkzgzhPQ05CmYWGWRIy6Ip87KrY iaFan33+sCUJ8lWUZ4UfyXR64HhO0hak7Wo5eTk+EfStHX/vUx9a9RLVh6oiMW2Ikxkc dOFA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=jmlSP0CB0tCbaVrRwisdgzmfb50Y5HjTey98Ug/0wd8=; b=QRG46f7pPwh2npgDDaNY08uBfdwaEreflzvxGuJq7SO7SG4dRf2mmyLLJZjn8g4pEJ kfr7nYF544lHU8s1yp+bLqc+LboFV8HCbxI+n5J0OcXgOIwWcTl3MLnSvz0WldlDDXAk GC2I0r06ym1vlsFub/dRfQ62hea6tdFqtQ9TNJkxmq8FtJ4unjNvE/kZF0TId8vRx8gT WHbH4IR04TzHHFt4l84mCPRTEDFXWZtziek3Vg13yCFzzzVC0nAgxUa/hku9RGI+ojl3 F3qzEvxrQIBlL+1up1vFC7E0zpA4tv8xaqGpiOW3DT7Qv78dpMW/ut69SPGKMl5sjDto 5dqw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5337HnP6nipPGYCdv+UUA1VBU2Lfpeih0ysAhm+R91shClWSS/MG wfNtgjfGDXs2PPrWQ+o4BGQqqg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwiXy63zoxn+hQ5+kTec8okqA8qThK61P7V/MyQQscsCwTLfySdhoDawfdpUj3h/CrMKUrHbQ== X-Received: by 2002:a37:b13:0:b0:6a6:8eb1:b5f7 with SMTP id 19-20020a370b13000000b006a68eb1b5f7mr5218561qkl.764.1654286605108; Fri, 03 Jun 2022 13:03:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (104-178-186-189.lightspeed.milwwi.sbcglobal.net. [104.178.186.189]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id bi37-20020a05620a31a500b006a6a550d371sm911648qkb.121.2022.06.03.13.03.24 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 03 Jun 2022 13:03:24 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 3 Jun 2022 16:03:23 -0400 From: Taylor Blau To: Jeff Hostetler Cc: Taylor Blau , Derrick Stolee via GitGitGadget , git@vger.kernel.org, gitster@pobox.com, johannes.schindelin@gmx.de, Derrick Stolee Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] rebase: update branches in multi-part topic Message-ID: References: <9d2752dd-6029-e71a-4149-0641fea879fe@jeffhostetler.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <9d2752dd-6029-e71a-4149-0641fea879fe@jeffhostetler.com> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Jun 03, 2022 at 03:59:00PM -0400, Jeff Hostetler wrote: > Should this take a branch pattern/regex to limit the set of branches > that are updated (or offered to be updated)? For example, if I have > an intermediate commit in the series that has 2 branch names pointing > at it, do we want to offer to update both of them or only the one > that matches some pattern related to the tip? Or is it sufficient to > just enumerate them at the bottom of the todo list and let the user > delete the lines they don't want? That could be a useful feature to layer on top. I don't think it's required here, though, since (as you note) users can remove lines from the update-ref invocation(s) at the bottom that they don't want to perform. > Should we actually do the update-ref's or should we write a script > that lets the user do it later? The latter would let us also write > out the commands to force update the remote refs if that would be > helpful. That seems like it would be outside the bounds of what `rebase` should provide, but others may feel differently. Thanks, Taylor