rebase docs: drop stray word in merge command description
PATCH 1/1 rebase docs: drop stray word in merge command description
Delete a misplaced word introduced by caafecfcf1 (rebase --rebase-merges: adjust man page for octopus support, 2018-03-09).
--- Documentation/git-rebase.txt | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
Documentation/git-rebase.txt +1 -1
@@ -979,7 +979,7 @@ when the merge operation did not even start), it is rescheduled immediately. At this time, the `merge` command will *always* use the `recursive` merge strategy for regular merges, and `octopus` for octopus merges, -strategy, with no way to choose a different one. To work around +with no way to choose a different one. To work around this, an `exec` command can be used to call `git merge` explicitly, using the fact that the labels are worktree-local refs (the ref `refs/rewritten/onto` would correspond to the label `onto`, for example).
Signature · 1 line
2.19.2
Hi Kyle,
Quoted 4 lines · Kyle Meyer
Delete a misplaced word introduced by
caafecfcf1(rebase --rebase-merges: adjust man page for octopus support, 2018-03-09).Signed-off-by Kyle Meyer <[email protected]>
ACK.
Too bad this did not make it into v2.20.0, but at least it can make it into a future version.
Thanks,
Johannes
Quoted 21 lines
--- Documentation/git-rebase.txt | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)Documentation/git-rebase.txt +1
-1@@ -979,7 +979,7 @@ when the merge operation did not even start), it is rescheduled immediately. At this time, the `merge` command will *always* use the `recursive` merge strategy for regular merges, and `octopus` for octopus merges, -strategy, with no way to choose a different one. To work around +with no way to choose a different one. To work around this, an `exec` command can be used to call `git merge` explicitly, using the fact that the labels are worktree-local refs (the ref `refs/rewritten/onto` would correspond to the label `onto`, for example).Signature · 1 line
2.19.2
Quoted 10 lines · Johannes Schindelin
Hi Kyle,
Quoted 4 lines · Kyle Meyer
Delete a misplaced word introduced by
caafecfcf1(rebase --rebase-merges: adjust man page for octopus support, 2018-03-09).Signed-off-by Kyle Meyer <[email protected]>ACK.
Thanks.
Quoted 2 lines
Too bad this did not make it into v2.20.0, but at least it can make it into a future version.
The right way to fix it is to prepare a topic that can be merged down to the 2.19.x track, and proceed normally to percolate it down via 'next', 'master' and 'maint' as any other fixes. That is already happening.
The original documentation bug is older than where the 2.20 track forked; the bug is in 2.19. Any such old bugs, users have survived without it being fixed for a cycle already, and the fix is not that urgent to interrupt the release engineering that is already underway and redo it.
A regression that appears only in -rc and a known bug in a new feature that appears only in -rc are different matters. It is prudent to always first access how serious they are and we must be prepared to even delay the final as necessary. But I do not think this one is.
Hi Junio,
Quoted 29 lines · Junio C Hamano
Quoted 10 lines · Johannes Schindelin
Hi Kyle,
Quoted 4 lines · Kyle Meyer
Delete a misplaced word introduced by
caafecfcf1(rebase --rebase-merges: adjust man page for octopus support, 2018-03-09).Signed-off-by Kyle Meyer <[email protected]>ACK.
Thanks.
Quoted 2 lines
Too bad this did not make it into v2.20.0, but at least it can make it into a future version.
The right way to fix it is to prepare a topic that can be merged down to the 2.19.x track, and proceed normally to percolate it down via 'next', 'master' and 'maint' as any other fixes. That is already happening.
The original documentation bug is older than where the 2.20 track forked; the bug is in 2.19. Any such old bugs, users have survived without it being fixed for a cycle already, and the fix is not that urgent to interrupt the release engineering that is already underway and redo it.
Quoted 5 lines
A regression that appears only in -rc and a known bug in a new feature that appears only in -rc are different matters. It is prudent to always first access how serious they are and we must be prepared to even delay the final as necessary. But I do not think this one is.
You are right, of course, this was not as critical a bug fix as others you integrated last minute.
Thanks,
Dscho