From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.1 (2015-04-28) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI, T_DKIM_INVALID shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.1 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id D9D301F597 for ; Tue, 31 Jul 2018 19:28:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1732193AbeGaVK2 (ORCPT ); Tue, 31 Jul 2018 17:10:28 -0400 Received: from mail-wm0-f67.google.com ([74.125.82.67]:51040 "EHLO mail-wm0-f67.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1729777AbeGaVK2 (ORCPT ); Tue, 31 Jul 2018 17:10:28 -0400 Received: by mail-wm0-f67.google.com with SMTP id s12-v6so4334962wmc.0 for ; Tue, 31 Jul 2018 12:28:40 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=sender:from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id :user-agent:mime-version; bh=+ltGsmQp9ehf/KZET6x0oCb6p9oFCfBI/Cx3ZkuI0iQ=; b=bCgo6d1ch018oVrgaRdlkwLayX+d3SwhhdYZrt9bxVsrgLguwbpQjOOM4vtWLuKg4n moTWpjB+CxwdgXNTPih349GLbt2oWvByNyzS8POCiVftA2nWd6A4wX/9fQS1/82q4Q/G dOmiveRGbvgJewq9/QClnkHBg1WL8WKu50Fwt5UAxtWhBgo7YDq7FLTKVdfRF9ARQeA9 MTjufBPeQRf0AvWacYbfXHYoOUdwZunlJ7E4fj5hBBqWR64AkQRbzmVPsAQ2zkAxEljj 27PHXuJYG8KARottW/FKfQXg5NOzCK/UDXt04SBEWBW8zhyNF/upSHNV01Bw4gdlb3ao bNXA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:from:to:cc:subject:references:date :in-reply-to:message-id:user-agent:mime-version; bh=+ltGsmQp9ehf/KZET6x0oCb6p9oFCfBI/Cx3ZkuI0iQ=; b=NUISWvE+QrEkTo+CKUxv2IqykAldFaNRGNySzaRKBIqYY8kg/DA91vjNDoI0p8uOML jkIimvqOo6D1N9vAXmSXqvENmw9+j9Ay8kMeqM+JR4JY1L37af8yujqoT6tDHI6b+GmO wEdpL3f+BDcHL34qGS0rvNL6zCNZavlVDBowlN58ldqudQntOXNpgs/KZntPwm+Tw5hn ynNoujvmLSC2SVGG89AJtIDTQrSCqm4nAfeza8epCzyQsufryTg7k1NGKQRmboNeTy/+ DhaNnneQh6k9YbIg/KURhLDbZyWcAkOaAvzj4L9ZBxb0YRF365AEB3uSXvOP3bByzcuv cTcw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOUpUlFqF00yN6ejTgc8kw100e3PGh6i1TrxXZ1QZFB0IMQ9a+x2VRIC /ZCSvU1K/EOkxUypC5obTzs= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AAOMgpceylUXbUYq7giE1BZNHmkoFqGMxR1KXOoZuNgUDzN9TS/KgP+X9uFnA0/ztAtQwYTZIrlKSQ== X-Received: by 2002:a1c:e043:: with SMTP id x64-v6mr682146wmg.58.1533065319536; Tue, 31 Jul 2018 12:28:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (168.50.187.35.bc.googleusercontent.com. [35.187.50.168]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id h5-v6sm18353775wrr.19.2018.07.31.12.28.38 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Tue, 31 Jul 2018 12:28:38 -0700 (PDT) From: Junio C Hamano To: Alban Gruin Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Stefan Beller , Christian Couder , Pratik Karki , Johannes Schindelin , phillip.wood@dunelm.org.uk Subject: Re: [GSoC][PATCH v5 00/20] rebase -i: rewrite in C References: <20180724163221.15201-1-alban.gruin@gmail.com> <20180731180003.5421-1-alban.gruin@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2018 12:28:38 -0700 In-Reply-To: <20180731180003.5421-1-alban.gruin@gmail.com> (Alban Gruin's message of "Tue, 31 Jul 2018 19:59:43 +0200") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Alban Gruin writes: > This patch series rewrite the interactive rebase from shell to C. Thanks. > It is based on ffc6fa0e39 ("Fourth batch for 2.19 cycle", 2018-07-24). > The v4 was based on b7bd9486 ("Third batch for 2.19 cycle", 2018-07-18). > I wanted to make sure my series works well with 'bb/pedantic', > 'jk/empty-pick-fix', and 'as/sequencer-customizable-comment-char', as > they modified sequencer.c. It is a good practice to keey an eye on other topics in flight to make sure you play well with others. What you can do better in a case like this is to apply the patches on the same base as v4 and then trial merge the result into the newer base of your choice (e.g. ffc6fa0e39), and also apply the same patches on top of the same newer base. If (1) the application to the old base goes cleanly, (2) the trial merge goes cleanly, and (3) the result of the trial merge exactly matches the tree as applying the patches on the newer base then it is preferrable not to rebase but keep the old base as the previous round to avoid needless churn. For a new development like this (as opposed to "fix for long standing bugs"), keeping an old and tested base does not matter too much, but it is a good discipline to get into to hold your base steady. The patches looked all good and applied cleanly. Will queue and wait for a few days to see if anybody spots something glaringly wrong (I expect none) and then merge it to 'next'. Thanks.