Karthik Nayak <karthik.188@xxxxxxxxx> writes: >> Just to let you know, as these two are fixups to the topic that are >> no longer in 'next' as we rewound the tip of 'next' after release, >> if you want, you can redo the base topic instead of piling small >> fixes on top. >> > > Well the first patch in this series, is a bug fix for master since we > already have batched updates exposed via git-update-ref(1). So only the > second patch can be squashed in. > > That said, while it is easier for me to not re-roll, I'd happy to do so, > what do you think? I'll let you decide; please choose whichever way you consider would give us the better result. The second one seems to be a band-aid that trades one bug with another bug, so it may be prudent to leave it separate. It would make it easier for a future change that fixes the lower-layer transaction processing to refer to it, with "earlier we took thw two step approach, which had these downsides. now we fix the issue for real". Thanks.
