Jeff King <p...@peff.net> writes:

>> It was a bit more painful than necessary to make sure I have
>> something that can be merged for 2.14.x maintenance track, but I
>> think the topic is now in a reasonable shape, and I've merged it to
>> 'next'.  On the first-parent chain from 'master' to 'pu', the merge
>> of this topic is the very first one, and after reading it over once
>> again, I think this is OK.
>
> Hmm. I think you would just want the top two commits for maint-2.14
> (reverting 136c8c8b8f and fixing up git-tag to check color config). But
> of course you can't do a partial merge because they come on top of the
> other dead-end/revert pair. You'd have to cherry-pick (and even then fix
> up a few bits, like adding in the "add -p" test).
>
> Though if we take all of jk/ui-color-always-to-auto-maint, and then do
> the whole reversion on top of that, I think that should work. It just
> doesn't look like that topic ever made it to "maint" (I see mention of a
> jk/ref-filter-colors-fix-maint in the log for master, but there's no
> such branch).

Yeah, that is what ended up to be jk/ref-filter-colors-fix; the
branch merges cleanly to 'master', but also to 'maint' without
dragging the rest of the recent development along with it---I did a
rebase before sending out the message you are responding to.

Reply via email to