Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes: >> That requires Meta/ to be checked out and up-to-date. I'd bet there are >> exactly two people who fall into that category. > > Actually, it is not Junio's Meta that needs checked out, but rather the > "meta" branch where you will find that "rebase" script. If other people > find them useful, the set of scripts could perhaps be transitioned to a > namespace that is appropriate to go into people's $PATH. > > I didn't really expect anybody to use it verbatim, though. I was > providing it more for inspiration. > >> Also, I see that you do not use worktrees. Otherwise your script would >> fail. > > Yes, the script predates the invention of worktrees by several years. I > have occasionally played with worktrees, but don't use them extensively > (I'd usually use them for a one-off change, and then remove the > worktree). I check out a different Meta/ at the top-level of my working tree when working on Git, but I do use an equivalent of "worktree" to have separate build areas for four integration branches. It is trivial to check out Meta/ just once to the primary working tree and symlink it to others ;-) One thing that struck me odd about your "rebase" script was that it didn't seem to have a special provision to handle a topic that builds on another topic. I saw toposort, but is that sufficient?