Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes: >> It was a bit more painful than necessary to make sure I have >> something that can be merged for 2.14.x maintenance track, but I >> think the topic is now in a reasonable shape, and I've merged it to >> 'next'. On the first-parent chain from 'master' to 'pu', the merge >> of this topic is the very first one, and after reading it over once >> again, I think this is OK. > > Hmm. I think you would just want the top two commits for maint-2.14 > (reverting 136c8c8b8f and fixing up git-tag to check color config). But > of course you can't do a partial merge because they come on top of the > other dead-end/revert pair. You'd have to cherry-pick (and even then fix > up a few bits, like adding in the "add -p" test). > > Though if we take all of jk/ui-color-always-to-auto-maint, and then do > the whole reversion on top of that, I think that should work. It just > doesn't look like that topic ever made it to "maint" (I see mention of a > jk/ref-filter-colors-fix-maint in the log for master, but there's no > such branch). Yeah, that is what ended up to be jk/ref-filter-colors-fix; the branch merges cleanly to 'master', but also to 'maint' without dragging the rest of the recent development along with it---I did a rebase before sending out the message you are responding to.
