Re: [PATCH 2/2] rebase -i: use some kind of config file to save author information

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Jun 23, 2009, 05:25 UTC
Message-ID: <7vljnja5dv.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
In-Reply-To: <200906230657.48627.chriscool@tuxfamily.org>

Christian Couder <chriscool@tuxfamily.org> writes:

> This patch would use the message from HEAD instead of "$DOTEST"/message, but 
> it looks like we are changing "$DOTEST"/message sometimes with 
> the "make_squash_message" function.

Heh, that is why it was "something along this line" patch ;-)

Regarding the C rewrite vs rebase--i.sh update, I tend to agree with Dscho that changing the scripted Porcelain is not worth it if we are rewriting the whole thing in C soon. But perhaps we can allow combinations of the two options ("-[cC] commit" and "-F file") given to "git commit"? The intent of the caller in such a case is quite clear---use the authorship but do use the message from the other source (if we do this, it would probably make sense to do that also for "-m message"). The version entirely written in C obviously does not even need such an option (it can read authorship from HEAD and use its own message), but the point is if going that route would eliminate the need to store "which commit were we dealing with when we gave the control back" information on disk. I suspect that the sequencing information is already on disk (i.e. $TODO file) and author-script may be redundant information.