From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.1 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 052C71F454 for ; Mon, 11 Nov 2019 09:08:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726834AbfKKJII (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 Nov 2019 04:08:08 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com ([64.147.108.71]:61064 "EHLO pb-smtp2.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726768AbfKKJIH (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 Nov 2019 04:08:07 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A2E1B39507; Mon, 11 Nov 2019 04:08:05 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=Y87P2QXCdh11mfeXc4X0RZnfR/8=; b=dFh+O7 7tiSeBwtA3xyJjxnpVDqaJxQfFleIGWaq1RChvlcnB4UUkhSIoqBrNrDAwKe623o cVmtl9py0g+VxjVyKme7/gRchAkvRQYPALcRGmFP7kC461QQvwAyh8DW/MDuOBUk xPsr0rznWo+Hm3M57HyDVY4e97mvbwRJnj454= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=s+3uXp3wa1V+omircFayQi1vqurB7aU9 OxCGGKKIfkAuRq6MgeMKFXaO7G0VGXM4DQ6+7uRXRVi/cxntTGLNRNqaxitPkUs+ NpgrMAGIZDATY5v/2jv1ZOuCCo8u9BiZl9N8SrNagCbf/gKkA9fMJfZADHu9yMmn wTCJK8G3vxs= Received: from pb-smtp2.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9AD8139506; Mon, 11 Nov 2019 04:08:05 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.76.80.147]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id DC27339505; Mon, 11 Nov 2019 04:08:04 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Naveen Nathan Cc: git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] doc: improve readability of --rebase-merges in git-rebase References: <20191110095942.GB6071@a.local> Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2019 18:08:03 +0900 In-Reply-To: <20191110095942.GB6071@a.local> (Naveen Nathan's message of "Sun, 10 Nov 2019 20:59:42 +1100") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: C526F120-0462-11EA-9F3D-D1361DBA3BAF-77302942!pb-smtp2.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Naveen Nathan writes: > When --rebase-merges was introduced in 427c3bd28a the sentence > describing the difference between --rebase-merges and --preserve-merges > is a little unclear and difficult to parse. This patch improves readability > while retaining original meaning. > > ... > -The `--rebase-merges` mode is similar in spirit to the deprecated > -`--preserve-merges`, but in contrast to that option works well in interactive > -rebases: commits can be reordered, inserted and dropped at will. > +The `--rebase-merges` mode is similar in spirit to `--preserve-merges` > +(deprecated) but actually works with interactive rebases, where commits > +can be reordered, inserted and dropped at will. I think the original "to the deprecated `--preserve-merges`" is mildly easier to follow than "to `--preserve-merges` (deprecated)". The later part of the sentence with this patch does read smoother and is a definite improvement. Thanks.