Elijah Newren <new...@gmail.com> writes: >> Note: I removed the --no-breaks command line option from the original patch >> as >> it will no longer be needed once the default has been changed [1] to turn it >> off. >> >> [1] >> https://public-inbox.org/git/20180430093421.27551-2-eckhard.s.ma...@gmail.com/ > > I'd just drop these lines from the commit message, and instead mention > that your patch depends on em/status-rename-config. > >> Original-Patch-by: Alejandro Pauly <alpa...@microsoft.com> >> Signed-off-by: Ben Peart <ben.pe...@microsoft.com> >> ---
Other things seem to have been resolved between you two already, so I'll only comment on a minor tangent here. >> Notes: >> Base Ref: master > > This patch does not apply to master; it has conflicts. > >> Web-Diff: https://github.com/benpeart/git/commit/823212725b As Git is distributed, unlike tags that are meant to be global among project participants by convention, a branch name can never be used as a trustable base among developers. Your 'master' branch may point at a different commit from mine, and my 'master' branch today may point at a different commit from mine yesterday. I've seen patches that used a similar note below the three-dash line that named an exact commit object name. That is a lot more reliable way to convey the information necessary to consturct the exact state the contributor worked on. > This web diff shows em/status-rename-config as the parent commit, not > master. Since your commit message mentions you want the change to > break detection provided by that series, just listing it as the > explicit base seems like the right way to go. Thanks for digging. That would work well, too.
