Re: What's cooking in git.git (Apr 2014, #09; Tue, 29)
- From
John Keeping <john@keeping.me.uk>
- Date
- May 7, 2014, 20:44 UTC
- Message-ID
- <20140507204420.GB9035@serenity.lan>
- In-Reply-To
- <536a96e762dc4_76ff7a52ec44@nysa.notmuch>
On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 03:26:15PM -0500, Felipe Contreras wrote:
Show 23 quoted lines
> Junio C Hamano wrote: > > Your git-integrate might turn into something I could augment my > > workflow with with some additions. > > > > - specifying a merge strategy per branch being merged; > > git-reintegrate[1] supports this. > > > - support evil merges or picking a fix-up commit; > > git-reintegrate supports this. > > > - leaving an empty commit only to leave comment in the history. > > Done[2]. > > > > and until that happens, I'll keep using the Reintegrate script found > > in my 'todo' branch. > > My git-reintegrate supports everything John's git-integrate and in > addition it supports generating the commands from an existing branch, > like your Reintegrate. IOW; it's superior.
And yet the documentation is unchanged from the version you copied in from git-integration. Personally I would much rather use a project which takes time to document all of the features rather than relying on reading the code to figure out the options.
More features does not make a project superior.