Strange commit

[Ed Maste]

On Thu, 26 Mar 2020 at 15:58, Ulrich Spörlein <uspoerlein at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I guess you're right. Seeing that vendor branches (while not a full
> tree branch) are usually "short" in terms of history (only a few
> commits, one would hope), I guess we should indeed represent them as
> proper git merges.
>
> Can you open a PR on the git_conv project, please?

I will, but I'll have to run the conversion again saving the output so
that I can figure out what branch name(s) are involved.