Re: pre-rebase hook: capture documentation in a <<here document

From: brian m. carlson <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net>
Date: Jul 11, 2017, 00:15 UTC
Message-ID: <20170711001527.mh7rcdvhxeouzbw7@genre.crustytoothpaste.net>
In-Reply-To: <20170710233525.11650-1-sbeller@google.com>

On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 04:35:25PM -0700, Stefan Beller wrote:

Show 22 quoted lines

> Junio wrote in "What's-cooking":
> 
> > ... I do not know how well they are tested
> > in the field by people using 'master' in their everyday workflow.
> > Ideally, our release process wants to see more people using 'next'
> > in their everyday workflow to keep 'master' more stable than any
> > tagged release, but I do not have a good idea on how to encourage
> > it more than we currently do.
> 
> Our internal release of git @ Google is debian experimental,
> which is basically the 'next' branch + this patch + another patch.
> 
> AFAICT It is a resend of
> https://public-inbox.org/git/20120308122105.GA1562@burratino/
> 
> As Jonathan is a Debian Developer, it is easy for us to base
> our internal version onto debian experimental, but long term we may
> want to base our internal version on the original next. :)
> To do so, upstream this one last meaningful patch.
> 
> The 'another patch' from above is changing and hardcoding
> the version number, which we do not want to upstream.

Thanks for sending this in. I had wanted to do so myself so I could easily automate building Git packages based on the Debian packaging, but I never got around to it.

-- 
brian m. carlson / brian with sandals: Houston, Texas, US
https://www.crustytoothpaste.net/~bmc | My opinion only
OpenPGP: https://keybase.io/bk2204