On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 5:19 PM, Sergey Organov <sorga...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Kaartic Sivaraam <kaartic.sivar...@gmail.com> writes:
>> 1. I see the following sentence in the "Rebasing merges: a jorney to the
>> ultimate solution (Road Clear) (written by Jacob Keller)" article
>>       "A few examples were tried, but it was proven that the original
>>       concept did not work, as dropped commits could end up being
>>       replaid into the merge commits, turning them into "evil"
>>       merges."
>> I'm not sure if 'replaid' is proper English assuming the past tense of
>> replay was intended there (which I think is 'replayed').
> It could have meant, say, "reapplied", -- we need to ask the author.

Yeah it could but I would say that it is not very likely compared to
"replayed", so I changed it to "replayed". And yeah I can change it to
something else if Jake (who is Cc'ed) prefers.

> While we are at it, please also consider to replace "original concept"
> by "original algorithm", as it didn't work due to a mistake in the
> algorithm as opposed to failure of the concept itself.

Ok, it's now "original algorithm".


Reply via email to