On Fri, Mar 30, 2018 at 2:02 AM, Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@xxxxxx> wrote: > Hi, > > On Mon, 19 Mar 2018, Christian Couder wrote: > >> On Sun, Mar 18, 2018 at 11:41 PM, Jacob Keller <jacob.keller@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > >> > I don't have a good summary yet, but I think a section about the >> > discussion regarding the new recreate-merges and rebasing merges >> > that's been on going might be useful? >> >> Yeah sure, we would gladly accept a summary of this discussion. > > I would *love* a summary of that discussion, especially since it got > pretty unwieldy (and partially out of hand, but that part probably does > not need a lot of detail apart from the adjective "heated"). > >> > a lot of that discussion occurred prior to git-merge (tho it's been >> > ongoing since then?). >> >> If you want to take the latest discussions into account, the summary >> could be either split into two parts, one for this edition and the >> other one for the next edition. Or we could wait and have the whole >> summary in the next edition. > > Jake, I do not know about your availability, but I would love it if you > could take a stab, as I trust you to be unbiased. I would not trust myself > to be unbiased because (as everybody saw who cared to read) I got a little > bit too emotional and should have stayed more professional. > > Thanks, > Dscho I hope to be able to make a summary of the discussion as best I can. It may take a bit as there is a lot of mails to read. I agree that a good summary should come from someone outside the discussion to reduce emotional bias. Thanks, Jake
