Re: What's cooking in git.git (Jan 2019, #03; Fri, 18)

From: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Date: Jan 19, 2019, 01:13 UTC
Message-ID: <CABPp-BFmYoeiOaB9Pf70TC3XftXjMEHGrPqxS8TgiiXR39q2rQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <xmqqfttpimdc.fsf@gitster-ct.c.googlers.com>

On Fri, Jan 18, 2019 at 3:22 PM Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:

Show 15 quoted lines

> * en/rebase-merge-on-sequencer (2019-01-07) 8 commits
>  - rebase: implement --merge via the interactive machinery
>  - rebase: define linearization ordering and enforce it
>  - git-legacy-rebase: simplify unnecessary triply-nested if
>  - git-rebase, sequencer: extend --quiet option for the interactive machinery
>  - am, rebase--merge: do not overlook --skip'ed commits with post-rewrite
>  - t5407: add a test demonstrating how interactive handles --skip differently
>  - rebase: fix incompatible options error message
>  - rebase: make builtin and legacy script error messages the same
>
>  "git rebase --merge" as been reimplemented by reusing the internal
>  machinery used for "git rebase -i".
>
>  On hold.
>  cf. <CABPp-BFckuONYcGGkCY3BuPypRULmhsk_OFHyYA2E4jM66BfeQ@mail.gmail.com>

Is the "on hold" comment still accurate? And if so, can I ask for clarification on what the hold is so I can know what action if any I need to take? The two things mentioned in the linked email that I see are (1) the need to lower-case part of the subject (which you squashed in already to create commit 68aa495b590d), and (2) the semantic conflict between js/rebase-am and my patch, for which you already squashed my fix into your merge of his series and suggested I not resend and just let the rerere logic handle it (cf. <xmqqmunxluj8.fsf@gitster-ct.c.googlers.com>)

I'm beginning to wonder if I should just resubmit patches individually or take some other dramatic action as the combined amount of time this series has been on hold has been quite a bit longer than usual for me. Suggestions welcome.

Thanks, Elijah