Hi Junio, On Mon, 26 Nov 2018, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Junio C Hamano <gits...@pobox.com> writes: > > > Thomas Gummerer <t.gumme...@gmail.com> writes: > > > >> Thanks for your work on this! I have read through the range-diff and > >> the new patch of this last round, and this addresses all the comments > >> I had on v10 (and some more :)). I consider it > >> Reviewed-by: Thomas Gummerer <t.gumme...@gmail.com> > > > > Thanks. > > > > One thing that bothers me is that this seems to have been rebased on > > 'master', but as long as we are rebasing, the updated series must > > also take into account of the sd/stash-wo-user-name topic, i.e. if > > we are rebasing it, it should be rebased on top of the result of > > > > git checkout -B ps/rebase-in-c master > > git merge --no-ff sd/stash-wo-user-name > > > > I think. > > https://travis-ci.org/git/git/builds/459619672 would show that this > C reimplementation now regresses from the scripted version due to > lack of such rebasing (i.e. porting a correction from scripted one). Oh, you know, at first I *mis-read* your mail to mean "don't you rebase all the time!", but in this case (in contrast to earlier statements about rebasing between iterations of patch series), you *do* want Paul to rebase. Let me see what I can come up with in my `git-stash` branch on https://github.com/dscho/git Ciao, Dscho
