On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 10:23:39AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Taylor Blau <me@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > Right... but I'm not sure that I agree that this other topic "builds" on > > the whole series. There is nothing in the last commit that the other > > series is dependent on. So, I was suggesting something like: > > > > $ git checkout tb/commit-graph-split-strategy > > $ git revert HEAD > > $ git checkout tb/commit-graph-fd-exhaustion-fix > > $ git rebase tb/commit-graph-split-strategy # making sure to drop the final patch > > We cannot do this, as fd-exhaustion-fix is already in 'next'. Ah, I didn't realize that it was already in next. Yep, makes sense that we can't change the topic like this. Now I understand why you prefer the below, thanks for an explanation. > >> Why don't we do this: > >> > >> $ git checkout tb/commit-graph-fd-exhaustion-fix > >> $ git revert tb/commit-graph-split-strategy > >> $ git checkout master > >> $ git merge tb/commit-graph-fd-exhaustion-fix > >> $ git branch -d tb/commit-graph-fd-exhaustion-fix tb/commit-graph-split-strategy > > > > That's fine with me, too. > > > >> That's the simplest solution and we'll have two fewer topics we need > >> to worry about when we are done. > > OK. Thanks, Taylor
