Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] Accommodate for pu having been renamed to seen

[Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1284 bytes --]

Hi,

On Wed, 24 Jun 2020, Junio C Hamano wrote:

> Denton Liu <liu.denton@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 02:48:37PM +0000, Johannes Schindelin via GitGitGadget wrote:
> >> Changes since v1:
> >>
> >>  * Rebased onto master (no conflicts, so it is safe, and it is more robust
> >>    than basing the patches on seen which already contains v1 of these
> >>    patches).
> >
> > Out of curiosity, why would we ever want to base any patches on `seen`?
>
> Never.  Even bulding on top of 'next' is discouraged.
>
> Either "prepare a merge on top of 'master' with all the topics in
> flight that you depend on, and base your series on top of it,
> risking that any one of these topics can take your series hostage"
> or "wait until these topics graduate and then base your topic on
> 'master'".  I'd vastly prefer the latter, as it would become
> cumbersome if one of the topics you base your series on gets
> rerolled.

I recall having had to base a patch on `seen` (née `pu`) because it
would otherwise have needed "two base branches". In another instance, I
made a patch to fix incorrectly-resolved merge conflicts.

There _are_ occasions when you want to base your patch on `seen`,
admittedly not very common occasions.

Ciao,
Dscho