Re: [PATCH 1/8] rebase: simplify code related to imply_merge()

>
> Phillip Wood <phillip.wood123@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > On 23/03/2023 16:22, Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
> >> The code's evolution left in some bits surrounding enum rebase_type that
> >> don't really make sense any more. In particular, it makes no sense to
> >> invoke imply_merge() if the type is already known not to be
> >> REBASE_APPLY, and it makes no sense to assign the type after calling
> >> imply_merge().
> >
> > These look sensible, did imply_merges() use to do something more which
> > made these calls useful?
>
> Good question.