Re: [PATCH] Changed timestamp behavior of options -c/-C/--amend
- From
Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
- Date
- Oct 30, 2009, 20:26 UTC
- Message-ID
- <20091030202628.GA26513@coredump.intra.peff.net>
- In-Reply-To
- <1256931394-9338-1-git-send-email-erick.mattos@gmail.com>
On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 05:36:34PM -0200, Erick Mattos wrote:
Show 8 quoted lines
> Anyway this update creates new options for choosing the source timestamp > or a new one. And set as default for -c option (editing one) to take a > new timestamp and for -C option the source timestamp. That is because > we are normally using the source as template when we we are editing and > as a correction when we are just copying it. > > Those options are also useful for --amend option which is by default > behaving the same.
Thanks, this is something I have been wanting. I have always thought that --amend should give a new timestamp, so that while I'm fixing up commits via "rebase -i" the commits end up in correct date order.
Your patch seems to always use the old timestamp for -C, the new one for -c, and the old one for --amend. I would want it always for --amend.
I talked with Shawn about this at the GitTogether; his counter-argument was that many people in maintainer roles will be amending or rebasing just to do little things, like marking Signed-off-by, and that the date should remain the same.
So my suspicion is that there are some people who almost always want --new-timestamp, and some people who almost always want --old-timestamp, depending on their usual workflow. In which case a config option probably makes the most sense (but keeping the command-line to override the config, of course).
> --- > Documentation/git-commit.txt | 10 ++++++++-- > builtin-commit.c | 15 ++++++++++++--- > 2 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
Tests?
Show 6 quoted lines
> Take an existing commit object, and reuse the log message > - and the authorship information (including the timestamp) > - when creating the commit. > + and the authorship information when creating the commit. > + By default, timestamp is taken from specified commit unless > + option --new-timestamp is included.
We should clarify that this is the _author_ timestamp. The committer timestamp is always updated. Yes, it is talking about authorship information in the previous sentence, but at least I had to read it a few times to figure that out. Plus there are some minor English tweaks needed, so maybe:
and the authorship information when creating the commit. By default, the author timestamp is taken from the specified commit unless the option --new-timestamp is used.
Show 6 quoted lines
> -c <commit>:: > --reedit-message=<commit>:: > Like '-C', but with '-c' the editor is invoked, so that > the user can further edit the commit message. > + By default, timestamp is recalculated and not taken from > + specified commit unless option --old-timestamp is included.
Ditto:
By default, the author timestamp is recalculated and not taken from the specified commit unless the option --old-timestamp is used.
Show 6 quoted lines
> @@ -134,6 +138,8 @@ OPTIONS > current tip -- if it was a merge, it will have the parents of > the current tip as parents -- so the current top commit is > discarded. > + By default, timestamp is taken from latest commit unless option > + --new-timestamp is included.
And:
By default, the author timestamp is taken from the latest commit unless the option --new-timestamp is included.
> + if (old_timestamp && new_timestamp)
> + die("You can not use --old-timesamp and --new-timestamp together.");Typo: s/samp/stamp/
But this mutual exclusivity implies to me that the option should probably be "--timestamp=old|new".
-Peff