From: Felipe Contreras Date: Mon, 02 Nov 2009 14:25:57 GMT Subject: Re: My custom cccmd Message-ID: <94a0d4530911020625i250c5d44rbf6dfc68fc69b520@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <7vr5skim76.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 11:52 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Felipe Contreras writes: > >> On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 11:53 PM, Junio C Hamano 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 wrote: >> On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 11:09 PM, Junio C Hamano 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. Cool. Is this script something that would make sense in the contrib section? -- Felipe Contreras