Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > greened@xxxxxxxxxxxxx (David A. Greene) writes: > >> Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> writes: >> >>> Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes: >>> >>> It sounds like the simplest and cleanest would be to treat it as if its >>> current version came as a patch submission, cook it just like any other >>> topic in 'pu' down to 'next' down to eventually 'master', with the usual >>> review cycle of pointing out what is wrong and needs fixing followed by a >>> series of re-rolls. >> >> Ok, but we will preserve the history via the subtree merge, yes? > > I'll comment on just this part, but a short answer is "no, I do not think > so". > > Even though you left "Jeff King writes", you removed everything he said > that I was quoting, and in order to understand why the answer is 'no', it > would have been better if you kept this part from what he said in your > reply: > >>> ... Either way, I do think it's >>> worth saving the commit history by doing a real merge. > > as that was what I was agreeing to with my "as if ... a patch submission". Ehh, s/agree/disagree/; -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html