Re: [PATCH 3/3] rebase: new convenient option to edit a single commit

From: Duy Nguyen <pclouds@gmail.com>
Date: Mar 4, 2014, 02:08 UTC
Message-ID: <CACsJy8Ct41PRb=_Ez7FLXbdiZkTU-tFYqtAxow9mCw7wYAfOhg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAPig+cTn-YcWHsGRKUZWqACJ5ZspWoB+f4i7hNj09_4Ci6odiw@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Mar 4, 2014 at 3:28 AM, Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com> wrote:

Show 18 quoted lines

> On Sat, Mar 1, 2014 at 9:53 PM, Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com> wrote:
>> "git rebase -e XYZ" is basically the same as
>>
>> EDITOR="sed -i '1s/pick XYZ/edit XYZ/' $@" \
>> git rebase -i XYZ^
>>
>> In English, it prepares the todo list for you to edit only commit XYZ
>> to save your time. The time saving is only significant when you edit a
>> lot of commits separately.
>
> Is it correct to single out only "edit" for special treatment? If
> allowing "edit" on the command-line, then shouldn't command-line
> "reword" also be supported? I, for one, often need to reword a commit
> message (or two or three); far more frequently than I need to edit a
> commit.
>
> (This is a genuine question about perceived favoritism of "edit", as
> opposed to a request to further bloat the interface.)

Heh I had the same thought yesterday. The same thing could be asked for "git commit --fixup" to send us back to the fixed up commit so we can do something about it. If we go along that line, then "git commit" may be a better interface to reword older commits..

-- 
Duy