From: Ramkumar Ramachandra <artagnon@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 23 Mar 2013 12:51:22 GMT
Subject: Re: [BUG?] rebase -i: edit versus unmerged changes
Message-ID: <CALkWK0nspPEaA3BLjgV6Qv2UgXRbDft1d6SmRCiVNJoxpqLFwg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <7vehf76uai.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>

Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> Ramkumar Ramachandra wrote:
>>
>>> I'd really to have that final 'git continue' in Git 2.0.  Can someone
>>> attempt to break up the migration path into manageable logical steps
>>> that we can start working on?
>>
>> Is there any deadline or migration path needed?  Depending on the
>> design, it might be possible to do without backward-incompatible
>> changes, meaning the migration path is "whatever someone feels like
>> implementing first lands first".
>
> FWIW, I am not convinced yet why we would even want "git continue"
> in the first place, so I won't be the one who would be suggesting a
> migration path.

Okay, I'm confused now.  You were the one who suggested a unified "git
continue" in the first place, if my memory serves me right.  Why are
you doubting it now?