Junio C Hamano <gits...@pobox.com> writes: >> As long as we can keep the reverse rference notes consistent, wouldn't >> amend propagation just consume them? > > Yes. Would that mean you do not need the notes/xref-* series we are > seeing here, and instead (re)use what Stefan's series, which already > needs to have access to and record the information anyway, records?
Just to avoid confusion or unnecessary guessing. Please do not take the above as "don't do notes/xref-; instead read from the 'meta commits'". I do not have a preference between the two proposed implementations. The important thing is that we won't end up with having to maintain two separate mechanisms that want to keep track of essentially the same class of information. FWIW I'd be perfectly fine if the unification goes the other way, as long as goals of both parties are met, and for that, I'd like to see you two work together, or at least be aware of what each other is doing and see if cross-pollination would result in a mutually better solution. Thanks
