Re: [PATCH 02/11] merge-ort: add initial outline for basic rename detection

From: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Date: Dec 14, 2020, 16:11 UTC
Message-ID: <CABPp-BHyNuhNtc6JQgQRBsQFbobzYyS6fs=nopRuv8c1+9zW_w@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <nycvar.QRO.7.76.6.2012141641230.25979@tvgsbejvaqbjf.bet>

Hi,

On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 7:42 AM Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> wrote:

Show 26 quoted lines

>
> Hi Elijah & Stolee,
>
> On Mon, 14 Dec 2020, Derrick Stolee wrote:
>
> > On 12/13/2020 2:47 AM, Elijah Newren wrote:
> > >
> > > Sorry for two different email responses to the same email...
> > >
> > > Addressing the comments on this patchset mean re-submitting
> > > en/merge-ort-impl, and causing conflicts in en/merge-ort-2 and this
> > > series en/merge-ort-3.  Since gitgitgadget will not allow me to submit
> > > patches against a series that isn't published by Junio, I'll need to
> > > ask Junio to temporarily drop both of these series, then later
> > > resubmit en/merge-ort-2 after he publishes my updates to
> > > en/merge-ort-impl.  Then when he publishes my updates to
> > > en/merge-ort-2, I'll be able to submit my already-rebased patches for
> > > en/merge-ort-3.
> >
> > Let's chat privately about perhaps creatin
>
> Yes, I am totally willing to push up temporary branches if that helps you,
> or even giving you push permissions to do that.
>
> Ciao,
> Dscho

Given the amount of changes left to push up, I suspect there'll be more cases where it'd be useful. If I could get push permissions, and a suggested namespace to use for such temporary branches, that'd help.

In this particular case, though, one of my two fears was already realized -- Junio jumped in and did the work of rebasing and conflict resolving for en/merge-ort-2 and en/merge-ort-3. I didn't want to burden him with that extra work, but what he pushed up for en/merge-ort-2 is identical to what I have. So, all I have to do is push en/merge-ort-3 with the extra changes I have in it. So this particular time is taken care of.

Thanks!