+ we use our tip, as discussed above
+ (optionally, can use some other commit which is ff
+ from all of the above, eg one of them)
+
+N. git-debrebase [--noop-ok] record-ffq-prev
+
+ does what is described above
+
+2. git-debrebase [--noop-ok] stitch
+
+ makes pseudomerge with ffq-prev
+ deletes ffq-prev
+
+ we will teach dgit to do
+ git-debrebase stitch
+ or some such ?
+
+following parts are not implemented and maybe aren't the
+best subcommand names etc.
+
+3. git-debrebase push
+
+ like git push only does stitch first
+ ??? command line parsing!
+
+4. git-debrebase release
+
+ stiches, finalises changelog, signs tags, pushes everything
+ for the future, when there is some automatic builder
+
+========================================
+
+import from gbp
+
+what about dgit view branch ?
+ideally, would make pseudomerge over dgit view
+would need to check that dgit view is actually dgit view of
+ ond of our ancestors
+failing that first push will need --overwrite
+that is what is currently implemented
+
+========================================
+
+how to handle divergence and merges (if not detected soon enough)
+
+same problem
+ if merge, look at branches before merge
+ generate new combined branch
+ pseudomerge to overwrite merge
+
+current avaiable strategies:
+
+ maybe launder foreign branch
+
+ if foreign branch is nmuish, can rebase it onto ours
+
+ could merge breakwaters (use analyse to find them)
+ merge breakwaters (assuming same upstream)
+ manually construct new patch queue by inspection of
+ the other two patch queues
+
+ instead of manually constructing patch queue, could use
+ gbp pq export and git merge the patch queues
+ (ie work with interdiffs)
+
+ if upstreams are different and one is ahead
+ simply treat that as "ours" and
+ do the work to import changes from the other
+
+ if upstreams have diverged, can
+ resolve somehow to make new upstream
+ do new-upstream on each branch separately
+ now reduced to previously "solved" problem