git-debrebase: Do not mind stitching an unlaundered branch

 <Diziet> I discover that stitch treats non-launderedness as a snag.
 <Diziet> This is not quite compatible with these newfangled
          push-your-unlaundered-stuff workflows.
 <Diziet> It would be possible to make one of prepush or stitch
          (currently synonyms) behave differently in this respect.

 <spwhitton> do you know why stitch treats non-launderedness as a snag?
 <spwhitton> given that we expect [most people] to use `git debrebase
          conclude`, which launders, and never invoke `git debrebase
          stitch` explicitly, it would be okay to change that such
          that `git debrebase stitch` does not consider
          non-launderedness to be a snag.

 <Diziet> I think it does that just because I am the kind of person
          who thinks, when writing some routine, "what could I check
          here?" :-)
 <Diziet> I think you are perhaps right that it ought not to.
 <Diziet> "conclude" didn't exist then of course.

 <spwhitton> okay.  git-debrebase(1) could note "you probably want
          conclude because you probably want to launder"

 <Diziet> Mmmm.

Signed-off-by: Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk>

1 files changed, 2 insertions, 1 deletions

diff --git a/git-debrebase.1.pod b/git-debrebase.1.pod
index 7325170..9f82a7c 100644
--- a/git-debrebase.1.pod
+++ b/git-debrebase.1.pod
@@ -84,7 +84,8 @@ This is a good command to run before pushing to a git server.
 
 If there is no ffq-prev, it is an error, unless --noop-ok.
 
-It is a snag (see B<-f>) if the branch is not laundered.
+You should consider using B<conclude> instead,
+because that launders the branch too.
 
 =item git-debrebase new-upstream-v0 <new-version> [<upstream-details>...]