On Mon, Aug 6, 2018 at 6:36 PM Junio C Hamano <gits...@pobox.com> wrote: > * pw/rebase-i-author-script-fix (2018-08-02) 2 commits > - sequencer: fix quoting in write_author_script > - sequencer: handle errors in read_author_ident() > (this branch uses es/rebase-i-author-script-fix.) > > Recent "git rebase -i" update started to write bogusly formatted > author-script, with a matching broken reading code. These are > being fixed. > > Undecided. > Is it the list consensus to favor this "with extra code, read the > script written by bad writer" approach?
Phillip's original "effectively one-liner" backward compatibility[1] seemed a reasonable compromise[2] between the choices of no backward compatibility and heavyweight backward compatibility of his re-roll[3]. His reference[4] to an earlier "one-liner" backward compatibility solution given similar circumstances bolstered the case for his original approach. [1]: https://public-inbox.org/git/20180731111532.9358-3-phillip.w...@talktalk.net/ [2]: https://public-inbox.org/git/455fafb5-3c92-4348-0c2c-0a4ab62cf...@talktalk.net/ [3]: https://public-inbox.org/git/20180802112002.720-3-phillip.w...@talktalk.net/ [4]: https://public-inbox.org/git/c7b8629d-7b93-2fbf-6793-0d566e86a...@talktalk.net/
