diff options
author | Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk> | 2018-04-22 22:46:28 +0100 |
---|---|---|
committer | Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk> | 2018-06-16 22:40:13 +0100 |
commit | c4ba5f47ca8674d6212dd9e76a4ee4185e815a75 (patch) | |
tree | fd4d36f2aea8967ec3c92fbdf602f8c1b49d2deb /tests/tests/quilt-splitbrains | |
parent | 6d23729c4dd314393f3e9596d4dcdd106cee4a11 (diff) |
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>
Diffstat (limited to 'tests/tests/quilt-splitbrains')
0 files changed, 0 insertions, 0 deletions