From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2018 16:48:51 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] rebase --recreate-merges --keep-empty: don't prune empty
Message-ID: <xmqq8takm4y4.fsf@gitster-ct.c.googlers.com>
In-Reply-To: <1f7194bb-f48b-e229-94ae-44c58636172f@talktalk.net>

Phillip Wood <phillip.wood@talktalk.net> writes:

> On 20/03/18 19:32, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
>> With or without the above plan, what we saw from you were a bit
>> messy to queue.  The --keep-empty fix series is based on 'maint',
>> while the --signoff series depends on changes that happened to
>> sequencer between 'maint' and 'master', but yet depends on the
>> former.
>
> Yes, that is awkward and unfortunate but the idea behind splitting them
> into two separate series was to have a single set of bug fixes in the
> history. The feature needed to be based on master, so if I'd had the bug
> fixes in the same series you'd of had to cherry-pick them to maint which
> would break branch/tag --contains. I'm not sure if that is a better option.

I said "a bit messy" but that was a statement of a fact, not a
complaint.  Sometimes, we cannot avoid that necessary solutions to
real-life problems must be messy.

I still think what you sent was the best organization, given the
constraints ;-).

Thanks.