All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Johannes Schindelin via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@gmail.com>
To: git@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Subject: [PATCH v2 0/1] rebase: drop the unwanted -y
Date: Wed, 06 Feb 2019 10:45:17 -0800 (PST)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <pull.118.v2.git.gitgitgadget@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <pull.118.git.gitgitgadget@gmail.com>

I totally missed that this patch made it into next, and then master. Sorry
about that.

Changes since v1:

 * Focused on the "why?" in the commit message.

Johannes Schindelin (1):
  Revert "rebase: introduce a shortcut for --reschedule-failed-exec"

 Documentation/git-rebase.txt |  6 ------
 builtin/rebase.c             | 21 ---------------------
 git-legacy-rebase.sh         |  6 ------
 t/t3418-rebase-continue.sh   |  3 ---
 4 files changed, 36 deletions(-)


base-commit: b5101f929789889c2e536d915698f58d5c5c6b7a
Published-As: https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git/releases/tag/pr-118%2Fdscho%2Frevert-rebase-y-v2
Fetch-It-Via: git fetch https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git pr-118/dscho/revert-rebase-y-v2
Pull-Request: https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git/pull/118

Range-diff vs v1:

 1:  e61ebc3060 ! 1:  a4857fb32d Revert "rebase: introduce a shortcut for --reschedule-failed-exec"
     @@ -2,22 +2,20 @@
      
          Revert "rebase: introduce a shortcut for --reschedule-failed-exec"
      
     -    When contributing the patch series, the cover letter tried to convey
     -    clearly that the patch introducing the shortcut -y was included only to
     -    show that it is possible, with a slight bias against it.
     +    This patch was contributed only as a tentative "we could introduce a
     +    convenient short option if we do not want to change the default behavior
     +    in the long run" patch, opening the discussion whether other people
     +    agree with deprecating the current behavior in favor of the rescheduling
     +    behavior.
      
     -    During the review, there were a couple reviewers who agreed with this
     -    sentiment, and the author was happy that this patch was not needed and
     -    concurred that it should be dropped. See e.g. Stefan Beller's reply:
     +    But the consensus on the Git mailing list was that it would make sense
     +    to show a warning in the near future, and flip the default
     +    rebase.rescheduleFailedExec to reschedule failed `exec` commands by
     +    default. See e.g.
          <CAGZ79kZL5CRqCDRb6B-EedUm8Z_i4JuSF2=UtwwdRXMitrrOBw@mail.gmail.com>
      
     -    However, it slipped by the original patch author (yours truly) that the
     -    patch *was* included when the branch made it to `next` and then when it
     -    made it to `master`.
     -
     -    So let's back out that patch before it even slips into an official
     -    release (in which case we would even have to support this unwanted
     -    flag).
     +    So let's back out that patch that added the `-y` short option that we
     +    agreed was not necessary or desirable.
      
          This reverts commit 81ef8ee75d5f348d3c71ff633d13d302124e1a5e.
      

-- 
gitgitgadget

  parent reply	other threads:[~2019-02-06 18:45 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-02-05 11:49 [PATCH 0/1] rebase: drop the unwanted -y Johannes Schindelin via GitGitGadget
2019-02-05 11:49 ` [PATCH 1/1] Revert "rebase: introduce a shortcut for --reschedule-failed-exec" Johannes Schindelin via GitGitGadget
2019-02-05 17:41   ` Junio C Hamano
2019-02-06 18:45 ` Johannes Schindelin via GitGitGadget [this message]
2019-02-06 18:45   ` [PATCH v2 " Johannes Schindelin via GitGitGadget
2019-02-06 19:28   ` [PATCH v2 0/1] rebase: drop the unwanted -y Junio C Hamano

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=pull.118.v2.git.gitgitgadget@gmail.com \
    --to=gitgitgadget@gmail.com \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=gitster@pobox.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.