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: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.0 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB7841F5AD for ; Fri, 10 Apr 2020 21:04:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726648AbgDJVEu (ORCPT ); Fri, 10 Apr 2020 17:04:50 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp20.pobox.com ([173.228.157.52]:59988 "EHLO pb-smtp20.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726638AbgDJVEu (ORCPT ); Fri, 10 Apr 2020 17:04:50 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp20.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA315C5366; Fri, 10 Apr 2020 17:04:48 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=Siaaxc6z8xez0fpSy2UpwIkI3Pg=; b=lSVSjQ 02VfHeANyKo7Zw5K+M56osIPDX8Nlh3K5eCkm4v0bawikEjgYRR1gdrlGD+7tuu8 PGymF93sFMAha1Kyz5JhPY7JWmf+qd0kGTxTnpR/FgxGvmwKfNJLtmsmdXZD96Yi 3cnhTiPmNyXkqDXHNzUmnCTLaR8My4ZBaCYuU= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=YNmw6Q152A7mQWAmqJ2xiReROsAGZhkB pkxBAR9g6XuQ3RqcMhWwaV2RpMALBu9R69VjA5Mw5KjQECIi8saud/IwBRCIISt7 DClvmMPPjkNFhc72RMmoq97E9zJg+qmPLLzIIrJxfqmljLQOMlHCRoL+N0WEjTJA rusS4R0Wdmg= Received: from pb-smtp20.sea.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A19E3C5365; Fri, 10 Apr 2020 17:04:48 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.74.119.39]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id ED2F0C5364; Fri, 10 Apr 2020 17:04:45 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: "Elijah Newren via GitGitGadget" Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, phillip.wood123@gmail.com, Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de, bturner@atlassian.com, sami@boukortt.com, Elijah Newren Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] rebase -i: mark commits that begin empty in todo editor References: Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2020 14:04:44 -0700 In-Reply-To: (Junio C. Hamano's message of "Fri, 10 Apr 2020 13:42:11 -0700") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: E829D484-7B6E-11EA-9D8B-B0405B776F7B-77302942!pb-smtp20.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Junio C Hamano writes: > "Elijah Newren via GitGitGadget" writes: > >> I wanted to base this commit on jt/rebase-allow-duplicate, in particular to >> add a patch moving his new --[no-]keep-cherry-picks arguments to be close to >> the --empty={drop,keep,ask} and --[no-]keep-empty flags, since all three are >> related. But unfortunately that series was based on 2.25, and my series >> needs to be based on 2.26. > > Even though this one might qualify as a regression fix to be based > on an older track, the other one is a new "feature" and is not even > in 'next' yet, so there is no reason why we must keep its base on > maintenance tracks (perhaps its earliest round was first queued when > 2.25 was the latest tagged release?) > > So I am OK to rebase the other topic to v2.26.0; would that help? I > already saw there was some entanglement with the other topic in one > of the patches in this series, so... This is a total tangent, but when I tried to rebase jt/rebase-allow-duplicate that builds directly on top of v2.25.0 to a newer base, after resolving conflicts, "commit -a" and "rebase --continue", somewhere I seem to have mangled the authorship. It could entirely be a driver error, or it may be a bug in "rebase", especially with recent backend change. I am planning to come back to it later to figure out if there is such a bug, but I'd need to recover from the authorship screwup first, so it may take some time.