From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE889C001DF for ; Fri, 28 Jul 2023 16:50:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S234529AbjG1QuO (ORCPT ); Fri, 28 Jul 2023 12:50:14 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:53260 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S234509AbjG1Qt4 (ORCPT ); Fri, 28 Jul 2023 12:49:56 -0400 Received: from bluemchen.kde.org (bluemchen.kde.org [IPv6:2001:470:142:8::100]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 640084227 for ; Fri, 28 Jul 2023 09:48:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ugly.fritz.box (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by bluemchen.kde.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E55F24188; Fri, 28 Jul 2023 12:47:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: by ugly.fritz.box (masqmail 0.3.6-dev, from userid 1000) id 1qPQcr-f6R-00; Fri, 28 Jul 2023 18:47:37 +0200 Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2023 18:47:37 +0200 From: Oswald Buddenhagen To: Junio C Hamano Cc: Linus Arver , Phillip Wood , git@vger.kernel.org, Kristoffer Haugsbakk Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] sequencer: beautify subject of reverts of reverts Message-ID: References: <2d416834-ef3e-01a2-6be0-9e88bc0de25e@gmail.com> <10523968-0f02-f483-69c4-24e62e839f70@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Jul 28, 2023 at 09:31:49AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: >>From that point >of view, allowing arbitrary number of "Reapply" repeated, optionally >prefixed by a single "Revert", does not sound like it is much better >compared to the current one---is it worth this much time to discuss, >only to halve the length of long runs of "Revert"? > yes, for two reasons: - the single "reapply" case is actually common; it's usually done after a previously missed pre-requisite was applied. - the fact that it's "beautified" _at all_ sends a signal (see previous mails). it doesn't have to be particularly sophisticated for that. regards