Re: [PATCH v6 00/10] The final building block for a faster rebase -i

[Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>]

Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> writes:

> Changes since v5:
>
> - replaced a get_sha1() call by a get_oid() call already.
>
> - adjusted to hashmap API changes

Applying this to the tip of 'master' yields exactly the same result
as merging the previous round js/rebase-i-final to the tip of
'master' and then applying merge-fix/js/rebase-i-final to adjust to
the codebase, so the net effect of this reroll is none.  Which is a
good sign, as it means there wasn't any rebase mistake and the evil
merge we've been carrying was a good one.

But at the same time, I prefer to avoid rebasing to newer 'master'
until the codebase starts drifting too far apart, or until a new
feature release is made out of newer 'master'.  This is primarily
because I want dates on commits to mean something---namely, "this
change hasn't seen a need to be updated for 'oops, that was wrong'
since this date".  This use of commit dates as 'priority date'
matters much less for a topic not in 'next', but as a general
principle, my workflow tries to preserve commit dates for all
topics.

For the above reason, I may hold onto this patch series in my inbox
without actually updating js/rebase-i-final topic until the current
cycle is over; please do not mistake it as this new reroll being
ignored.

Thanks.