Re: using oldest date when squashing commits

From: Oswald Buddenhagen <oswald.buddenhagen@gmx.de>
Date: Oct 24, 2023, 10:18 UTC
Message-ID: <ZTeZ3KEQLIVU/sq2@ugly>
In-Reply-To: <a99b16a8-a06c-4d38-bb78-46ce17411597@gmail.com>

On Tue, Oct 24, 2023 at 10:26:29AM +0100, Phillip Wood wrote:

Show 16 quoted lines

>On 20/03/2022 08:05, Johannes Sixt wrote:
>> Am 19.03.22 um 13:48 schrieb Oswald Buddenhagen:
>>> during interactive rebasing, i sometimes find it necessary to move a
>>> hunk from one commit to a later one in the branch. now, if that hunk
>>> cannot be re-ordered with the later commit due to conflicting with it,
>>> it becomes necessary to squash the later commit onto a temporary commit
>>> created from the extracted hunk, not the other way around (or using a
>>> stash). unfortunately, this causes the author date of the later commit
>>> to be reset, which can rather seriously falsify the date if the branch
>>> is long-lived.
>> 
>> You want `fixup -C` in the todo-list. See the hints near the end of the
>> todo-list.
>
>Unfortunately "fixup -C" only copies the commit message not the 
>authorship

>(that's usually a good thing
>

why? what would that be useful for? it seems rather counter-intuitive. it's also inconsistent with commit -c/-C's behavior, which seems like a red flag to me.

>but not it means it wont work for what Oswald wants to do).

>Maybe we should add another flag for fixup/squash commands to take the 
>authorship from that commit.
>

that's a possibility. but given the above, it might be better to simply change the behavior of -c/-C to keep the UI lean and consistent with commit's behavior.

regards