Hi Ævar,

On Mon, 22 Mar 2021, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:

> I recently started using rebase.rescheduleFailedExec=true and noticed
> this bug in its implementation.

Okay, there is a bug. "This bug". Let's read on to find out what it is.

> It's conceptually a relatively simple fix,

Wait, hold on, there is a fix, but what is the bug?

> but as noted in 3/3 rebase being a "start this operation, run other
> command verbs later" has an unintuitive interaction with our usual
> "command-line options override config".

Oh, so there is a detailed analysis of the bug, whatever it is, in the
third patch in this patch series.

But what is the bug.

> !README FIRST!
> Everthing after this line has no relevance to this series, it's just a
> side musing on another (mis-)feature of --reschedule-failed-exec.
> !/README FIRST!

Hold on! I should read this first? Why is this not on top of the cover
letter, then?

Oh, and wait, everything after that has no relevance to this series? Then
where is the high-level description of the bug, a motivator to read this
patch series?

;-)

I guess I will find out when I have set aside some time to read the patch
series, which is on my back burner because nothing I read so far makes
this more urgent than other tasks I had planned on addressing this week.

Or maybe you could enhance the cover letter by skipping the rant, and by
giving a very rough overview of the bug at the top of the cover letter?
Think of the cover letter as an elevator pitch to make me want to spend
time on reviewing your patch series.

Ciao,
Dscho

> [... snip rant about the odd progress counting when rescheduling todo
> commands ...]