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 137841F466 for ; Wed, 15 Jan 2020 22:53:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1730252AbgAOWxI (ORCPT ); Wed, 15 Jan 2020 17:53:08 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com ([64.147.108.71]:58052 "EHLO pb-smtp2.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727016AbgAOWxI (ORCPT ); Wed, 15 Jan 2020 17:53:08 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 45CA73CEA7; Wed, 15 Jan 2020 17:53:06 -0500 (EST) (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=ZVC8wc+zhKsYi2wbccNuf7QUGzE=; b=PJ1bV/ TkQ7ssaD9teqYMSlblnhOl97Yqf5UPV3En2DeGrZTllaQBrnF9gSMhPPhOkMQCx3 lwAZhXSthQNbrjhYECiQSYsgCSBQk46ZqL2ETKCX70COZ9djWUanu4TdOw+P9+2n w5K6z6NuAnugilkwkwZ6VAjLJhOHMuI8sGcms= 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=iB9bFgLhYVpq0kcoE7SltHQh7sYMjUt7 zasrf5yr7yYhsGWqwg8/o7bj5e0L2ARji+gmKB9VzD53QMN/n73jZzFT5KKfMQ6N szKnpWmbP7fKHap7Xjo4lm50pvXOlkiZWrLduTQUzDsSPRmP3tiX/wLBlJMTuwm0 U3bMZiA413w= Received: from pb-smtp2.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3AC0B3CEA6; Wed, 15 Jan 2020 17:53:06 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.76.80.147]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 876A83CEA2; Wed, 15 Jan 2020 17:53:05 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Johannes Schindelin Cc: Git Mailing List Subject: Re: "rebase -ri" (was Re: Problems with ra/rebase-i-more-options - should we revert it?) References: <089637d7-b4b6-f6ba-cce1-29e22ce47521@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2020 14:53:04 -0800 In-Reply-To: (Junio C. Hamano's message of "Wed, 15 Jan 2020 10:14:05 -0800") 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: CAB0A360-37E9-11EA-88E9-D1361DBA3BAF-77302942!pb-smtp2.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Junio C Hamano writes: >> Having said that, if you ever find yourself wanting Just One Feature in >> `--rebase-merges` that would make it worthwhile for you to think about >> switching your patch-based workflow to a `rebase -ir`-based one, please >> let me know, and I will try my best to accommodate. I missed a mention of 'patch' here when I prepared my earlier reply. I do not expect "rebase -ri" to play any role in the part of the workflow that accepts patches from the mailing list. The involvement of "rebase -ri" (vs Meta/Reintegrate) is purely what happens after a topic is queued and starts to get tested with other topics on integration branches, and no "patch based workflow" plays any role there---it does not make any sense to base that part on anything but merge (and possibly cherry-picking an evil merge from an earlier round).