Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 3:40 AM, Thomas Rast <trast@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>
>>> On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 3:09 AM, Thomas Rast <trast@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>> Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>>
>>>>> Feel free to implement that. I'm just interested in 'git cherry-pick' being
>>>>> usable for 'git rebase' purposes.
>>>>
>>>> Which would have been obvious to all but the most casual readers, eh?
>>>
>>> My motivations are irrelevant, the patch is good as it is.
>>
>> You fooled both Junio (AFAICT anyway) and me, who both reviewed the
>> patch under the assumption that it implements note copying *along the
>> lines of existing note copying*. This proved to be a wrong, and
>> time-wasting, assumption.
>
> Whatever arbitrary rules you are talking about, they are not codified in tests.
Tests or code don't have a thing to do with it. This is about how you
are presenting your changes to the rest of the git community. As
evidenced above, said presentation is not clear enough to communicate
your goals to at least two experienced git developers (if I may say so
myself). How are we supposed to review a change if it is not even clear
what goal it satisfies?
Again: I'll be happy to review your proposed changes if and when you
resend the series with commit messages.
--
Thomas Rast
trast@{inf,student}.ethz.ch
--
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