On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 11:52 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
Show 30 quoted lines
> Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 11:53 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
>>> It might make more sense if your tool told you about such a case directly,
>>> rather than helping you find John so that he can tell you ;-).
>>
>> But that's not the purpose of the cccmd tool.
>>
>> I agree that such "patch series simplificator" tool would be very
>> useful, but that's out of scope for this. Isn't it?
>
> Exactly.
>
> So you agree that you _do_ want to "discard the previous commits in the
> patch series", because not doing so would mean the result would be a
> half-cooked "patch series simplificator" that tries to do something that
> is outside the scope of cccmd, right?
>
> The "discarding the previous commits" happens to match what I suggested
> earlier that lead to your "explored this a bit more":
>
> On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 11:37 PM, Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 11:09 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
>>> #2. If you have two patch series that updates one file twice, some
>>> changes in your second patch could even be an update to the changes
>>> you introduced in your first patch. After you fix issue #1, you
>>> would probably want to fix this by excluding the commits you have
>>> already sent the blames for.
>
> so I think we are in agreement.
Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com>