Re: What's cooking in git.git (topics)
- From
Jon Loeliger <jdl@freescale.com>
- Date
- May 30, 2008, 21:10 UTC
- Message-ID
- <48406D5C.4000703@freescale.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <7vhccfiksy.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org>
Junio C Hamano wrote:
Show 28 quoted lines
> Here are the topics that have been cooking. Commits prefixed > with '-' are only in 'pu' while commits prefixed with '+' are > in 'next'. > > > * js/rebase-i-sequencer (Sun Apr 27 02:55:50 2008 -0400) 17 commits > + Use perl instead of tac > + Fix t3404 assumption that `wc -l` does not use whitespace. > + rebase -i: Use : in expr command instead of match. > + rebase -i: update the implementation of 'mark' command > + Add option --preserve-tags > + Teach rebase interactive the tag command > + Add option --first-parent > + Do rebase with preserve merges with advanced TODO list > + Select all lines with fake-editor > + Unify the length of $SHORT* and the commits in the TODO list > + Teach rebase interactive the merge command > + Move redo merge code in a function > + Teach rebase interactive the reset command > + Teach rebase interactive the mark command > + Move cleanup code into it's own function > + Don't append default merge message to -m message > + fake-editor: output TODO list if unchanged > > This may complement the proposed "sequencer" GSoC project. Dscho seems to > have quite a strong objection to the 'mark' syntax and mechanism being > unnecessarily complex. Let's wait and see if a less complex but equally > expressive alternative materializes...
Well, there are the two not-quite facetious suggestions I made off list to Junio. Granted, he though they would be overkill (too), but I guess I could make them here for the general record in any case.
One suggestion was to make a procedural model out of the commit graph and allow something like this:
b :- pick(B)
x :- merge(pick(A), b)
y :- merge(pick(C), b)
z :- merge(x, y)My second and semi-equivallent suggestion was to allow a lisp-like notation:
(merge (merge (pick A)
(pick B)
(merge (pick B)
(pick C)As Junio observed, even that could be beyond what most casual git rebase -i users are willing to do to a sequencer edit stream before getting down to business.
Ah well. :-)
jdl