On Sat, Jan 06, 2018 at 10:29:21AM -0700, Carl Baldwin wrote: > > When n==m==1, "amended" pointer from X1 to A1 may allow you to > > answer "Is this the first attempt? If this is refined, what did the > > earlier one look like?" when given X1, but you would also want to > > answer a related question "This was a good start, but did the effort > > result in a refined patch, and if so what is it?" when given A1, and > > "amended" pointer won't help at all. Needless to say, the "pointer" > > approach breaks down when !(n==m==1). > > It doesn't break down. It merely presents more sophisticated situations > that may be more work for the tool to help out with. This is where I > think a prototype will help see these situations and develop the tool to > manage them. That's another way of saying "break down". And if the goal is a prototype, may I gently suggest that the way forward is trailers in the commit body, ala: Change-Id: I0b793feac9664bcc8935d8ec04ca16d5 or Upstream-4.15-SHA1: 73875fc2b3934e45b4b9a94eb57ca8cd Making changes in the commit header is complex, and has all *sorts* of forward and backwards compatibility challenges, especially when it's not clear what the proper data model should be. Cheers, -Ted
