From: John Keeping <john@keeping.me.uk>
Date: Wed, 07 May 2014 20:44:20 GMT
Subject: Re: What's cooking in git.git (Apr 2014, #09; Tue, 29)
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:
> 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.