Re: Using StGIT for tweaking already-committed stuff

From: Karl Hasselström <kha@treskal.com>
Date: May 10, 2007, 22:23 UTC
Message-ID: <20070510222347.GB12366@diana.vm.bytemark.co.uk>
In-Reply-To: <20070510200253.GD4489@pasky.or.cz>

On 2007-05-10 22:02:53 +0200, Petr Baudis wrote:

Show 8 quoted lines

> On Thu, May 10, 2007 at 09:48:05PM CEST, Carl Worth wrote:
>
> > The -n option is something I hadn't noticed, and that helps,
> > (except that what I've got to start with is a git revision name,
> > not a number).
>
> Hmm, yes, I've been thinking myself that it would be quite nice if I
> could just tell uncommit git revname right away.

It shouldn't be hard to do. Instead of uncommitting a fixed number of commits, loop until you reach a specified commit.

Show 11 quoted lines

> > But there are still some places where an experienced git user runs
> > into some awkward situations trying to use stg. For example, "stg
> > refresh" is basically always doing the equivalent of "commit -a"
> > so there's annoyingly no way to refresh only some of the modified
> > state into the commit.
>
> Yes, I fear that StGIT hides the index in a similar way that Cogito
> does. It seems like user index usage is undergoing kind of
> renaissance these days in Git community (at least it seems to me
> this way, maybe it's always been this way), it would probably make
> sense to allow making use of index in StGIT as well.

I agree. It's bad UI for StGIT to behave different from git, given that easy interoperation is a goal.

Show 5 quoted lines

> > Also, if I want to edit a commit message while under the influence
> > of stg, how do I do that? If I do "git commit --amend" will I
> > seriously confuse stg, (I'm guessing I would, but I don't know).
>
> I have no idea, but there's stg refresh -e.

Yes, you would confuse it; the patch ref would still point to the old commit object, but that would no longer be an ancestor of HEAD. StGIT doesn't know how to recover from this, so you'd have to do it by hand, which is annoying.

I'm working on making StGIT more robust against this kind of damage, but I'm not quite done yet.

> And yes, it would be cool if stg new could guess patch name from the
> subject line in a similar manner that stg uncommit does.

Good idea. This would be embarrassingly easy to do.

But you can kind of do it today. Just commit with git (my favorite here is the emacs modes) and "stg assimilate"!

-- 
Karl Hasselström, kha@treskal.com
      www.treskal.com/kalle