Re: Some ideas for StGIT

From: Karl Hasselström <kha@treskal.com>
Date: Aug 6, 2007, 09:56 UTC
Message-ID: <20070806095623.GA23349@diana.vm.bytemark.co.uk>
In-Reply-To: <b0943d9e0708060236x19674e4cjf04cec716ae6246c@mail.gmail.com>

On 2007-08-06 10:36:25 +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote:

Show 10 quoted lines

> On 03/08/2007, Pavel Roskin <proski@gnu.org> wrote:
>
> > Another approach would be to reexamine the patch after "stg
> > refresh -es" and to apply it instead of the original patch. If the
> > patch doesn't apply, the options would be to discard the edits or
> > to re-launch the editor.
>
> That's an interesting idea but maybe we should have a separate
> command like --edit-full to edit the full patch + log (part of the
> functionality already available in import).

I never really understood why commit message editing had to be part of the "refresh" command. If it were a separate command and not tied to refresh, we could allow editing the message (and author, committer, date, ...) of any commit in the stack -- since the tree objects would be unchanged, we could just reuse the same tree objects when rewriting the commit objects on top of it.

That's obviously not going to work if we allow editing of the patch. But patch editing isn't a good fit as a refresh switch either, since it's not at all related to replacing the tree of the current patch with the working tree.

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