From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Sun, 06 Nov 2011 07:47:34 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH] pull: introduce a pull.rebase option to enable --rebase
Message-ID: <7v8vnt7kvd.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
In-Reply-To: <1320507358-3407-1-git-send-email-avarab@gmail.com>

Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason  <avarab@gmail.com> writes:

> This option will be considered at a lower priority than
> branch.<name>.rebase, i.e. we could set pull.rebase=true and
> branch.<name>.rebase=false and the latter configuration option would
> win.
>
> Reviewed-by: Sverre Rabbelier <srabbelier@gmail.com>
> Reviewed-by: Fernando Vezzosi <buccia@repnz.net>
> Reviewed-by: Eric Herman <eric@freesa.org>
> Signed-off-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>

I see many reviewed-by lines, but what kind of review did this patch have,
exactly? It seem to break its own test (branch.to-rebase.rebase should
override pull.rebase).

I think I've queued most (if not all) of the patches in flight except for
Ram's sequencer reroll to 'pu' and pu^ passes the test but the tip of pu
does not due to this topic.

Thanks for other topics from the Amsterdam together, by the way. I did not
comment on them individually but they looked mostly reasonable from a
quick glance.