Elijah Newren <newren@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > Having read the rest of this thread, I notice you pointed out to Junio > that you want to amend a commit in the history of the merge, > suggesting you are just modifying the commit message (or maybe > author/committer info). More generally, I _think_ your usecase and > justification for this patch could be worded something like: > > """ > We often rebase with `--rebase-merges`, `--interactive`, and > `--keep-base` (or equivalent command line flags) and only modify > commit metadata during the rebase. Since we do not modify any files, > we would like the rebase to proceed without conflicts. It makes very much sense to focus on this narrow but useful use case, and I view it a very natural extension to already existing "if we just pick without any user interaction a commit on top of its current base, the we do not do anything, fast-forward and just pretend we picked it". IOW, shouldn't it something the sequencer machinery should be able to do natively without forcing the user to specify a new merge strategy?
