From: Phillip Wood Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2023 14:00:58 GMT Subject: Re: using oldest date when squashing commits Message-ID: <138631cd-ead3-4f22-95ce-61afccfa409f@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: On 24/10/2023 11:18, Oswald Buddenhagen wrote: > On Tue, Oct 24, 2023 at 10:26:29AM +0100, Phillip Wood wrote: >> On 20/03/2022 08:05, Johannes Sixt wrote: >>> Am 19.03.22 um 13:48 schrieb Oswald Buddenhagen: >>>> during interactive rebasing, i sometimes find it necessary to move a >>>> hunk from one commit to a later one in the branch. now, if that hunk >>>> cannot be re-ordered with the later commit due to conflicting with it, >>>> it becomes necessary to squash the later commit onto a temporary commit >>>> created from the extracted hunk, not the other way around (or using a >>>> stash). unfortunately, this causes the author date of the later commit >>>> to be reset, which can rather seriously falsify the date if the branch >>>> is long-lived. >>> >>> You want `fixup -C` in the todo-list. See the hints near the end of the >>> todo-list. >> >> Unfortunately "fixup -C" only copies the commit message not the >> authorship > >> (that's usually a good thing >> > why? what would that be useful for? > it seems rather counter-intuitive. In the same way that you do not want to change the author date when using a fixup to move a small hunk from one commit to another most users do not want to update the author information when they make a small change to a commit message using "fixup -C" > it's also inconsistent with commit -c/-C's behavior, which seems like a > red flag to me. That could mean the option is mis-named instead rather than the behavior being wrong. >> but not it means it wont work for what Oswald wants to do). > >> Maybe we should add another flag for fixup/squash commands to take the >> authorship from that commit. >> > that's a possibility. but given the above, it might be better to simply > change the behavior of -c/-C to keep the UI lean and consistent with > commit's behavior. "fixup -c/-C" were conceived as a way to reword a commit message at the same time as optionally fixing up the commit's content. I think changing the behavior to automatically update the authorship would surprise people and as I said above most of the time one does not want that behavior. Best Wishes Phillip