Re: Draft of Git Rev News edition 38

From: Christian Couder <christian.couder@gmail.com>
Date: Apr 16, 2018, 22:30 UTC
Message-ID: <CAP8UFD3ei7NEfiqBbWe_PKdrcW93t2pA=u-ub29X+jGOi9-Jwg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <87efjf6uwg.fsf@javad.com>

On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 5:19 PM, Sergey Organov <sorganov@gmail.com> wrote:

Show 14 quoted lines

> Kaartic Sivaraam <kaartic.sivaraam@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> 1. I see the following sentence in the "Rebasing merges: a jorney to the
>> ultimate solution (Road Clear) (written by Jacob Keller)" article
>>
>>       "A few examples were tried, but it was proven that the original
>>       concept did not work, as dropped commits could end up being
>>       replaid into the merge commits, turning them into "evil"
>>       merges."
>>
>> I'm not sure if 'replaid' is proper English assuming the past tense of
>> replay was intended there (which I think is 'replayed').
>
> It could have meant, say, "reapplied", -- we need to ask the author.

Yeah it could but I would say that it is not very likely compared to "replayed", so I changed it to "replayed". And yeah I can change it to something else if Jake (who is Cc'ed) prefers.

> While we are at it, please also consider to replace "original concept"
> by "original algorithm", as it didn't work due to a mistake in the
> algorithm as opposed to failure of the concept itself.

Ok, it's now "original algorithm".

Thanks, Christian.