Hi Dscho,
>> However, maintaining more than one directory (like "sequencer" for
>> sequencer state and "rebase-merge" for rebase todo and log) can cause
>> the necessity to be even more careful when hacking on sequencer... For
>> example, the cleanup code must delete both of them, not only one of
Hi Stephan,
On Sat, 17 Dec 2016, Stephan Beyer wrote:
> On 12/14/2016 08:29 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> > Johannes Schindelin writes:
> >> -/* We will introduce the 'interactive rebase' mode later */
> >> static inline int is_rebase_i(const struct replay_opts *opts)
> >> {
> >> - return 0;
>
Hi Junio,
On Tue, 13 Dec 2016, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Johannes Schindelin writes:
>
> > @@ -395,7 +414,10 @@ static int do_recursive_merge(struct commit *base,
> > struct commit *next,
> >
> > if (active_cache_changed &&
> > write_locked_index(&the_index, &index_lock, COMMIT_LOC
Hi,
On 12/14/2016 08:29 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Johannes Schindelin writes:
>> -/* We will introduce the 'interactive rebase' mode later */
>> static inline int is_rebase_i(const struct replay_opts *opts)
>> {
>> -return 0;
>> +return opts->action == REPLAY_INTERACTIVE_REBASE;
>> }
Johannes Schindelin writes:
> -/* We will introduce the 'interactive rebase' mode later */
> static inline int is_rebase_i(const struct replay_opts *opts)
> {
> - return 0;
> + return opts->action == REPLAY_INTERACTIVE_REBASE;
> }
>
> static const char *get_dir(const struct replay_o
Johannes Schindelin writes:
> static inline int is_rebase_i(const struct replay_opts *opts)
> {
> - return 0;
> + return opts->action == REPLAY_INTERACTIVE_REBASE;
> }
>
> static const char *get_dir(const struct replay_opts *opts)
> {
> + if (is_rebase_i(opts))
> +
This patch introduces a new action for the sequencer. It really does not
do a whole lot of its own right now, but lays the ground work for
patches to come. The intention, of course, is to finally make the
sequencer the work horse of the interactive rebase (the original idea
behind the "sequencer" c
7 matches
Mail list logo
