Re: [PATCH 2/6] commit: add amend suboption to --fixup to create amend! commit

>
> Charvi Mendiratta <charvi077@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > Thanks a lot for explaining each perspective in detail. So, now if we
> > use `-m` as an option to write side-note then `--squash` is already
> > available and for fixing the commit message opening the editor is a
> > must expected option. So shall we remove the `-m` option compatibility
> > if `amend`/ `reword` suboptions are passed to `git commit --fixup` ?
>
> FWIW, I do not have a strong opposition against -m/-F that is not
> rejected when --fixup=amend is in use.  It is OK for Git to accept
> useless combinations of options that do not help end-users.  A
> combination that is not useful will be left unused, which is not a
> great loss.

> I was just hoping that letting "-m <message>" and "--fixup=amend"
> used at the same time would support a great use case, and because I
> didn't think of any, I asked the person who allowed the combination
> (that is you) what the intended use cases are.  Actively supporting
> a combination because it gives users great value is more satisfying
> than just leaving useless combination to exist only because it does
> not actively hurt.  When users say "The command can take these two
> options at the same time, but I cannot figure out what good the
> combination is for. It feels utterly useless to use them together"
> it also is much easier to answer them if we can say "because by
> using these two together, you can do this great thing" instead of
> having to say "we do not think it makes much sense to use these two
> options together."
>