Re: [RFC PATCH] Make the rebase edit mode really end up in an edit state

From: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Date: Jan 15, 2009, 12:36 UTC
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.1.00.0901151325310.3586@pacific.mpi-cbg.de>
In-Reply-To: <bd6139dc0901150352t2d2fa388x3eb842bbc8c4baa6@mail.gmail.com>

Hi,

On Thu, 15 Jan 2009, Sverre Rabbelier wrote:

> On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 11:01, Johan Herland <johan@herland.net> wrote:
> > "modify" does the "git reset --soft HEAD^" (Anders' suggestion)

I could live with "modify".

Show 12 quoted lines

> > "amend" requires a "git commit --amend" (current behaviour)
> 
> Why have amend do the same as edit? If you add an 'amend' one instead
> make it drop you into an editor to change the commit message. That's a
> workflow I often use. Often times I do not have a proper commit
> message when I commit (sometimes it is the result of "git commit -a -m
> "tmp"). To me having an 'amend' command that allows one to edit the
> commit message would make sense a lot :).
> 
> > "edit" == "amend", but is deprecated and goes away in the future
> 
> And as such, have edit do what it currently does.

FWIW I fully agree.

If at all, I'd introduce 'examine' as a synonym to 'edit' (might be more intuitive).

However, for the same reason (is it intuitive?) I am not fully convinced of 'amend' either. Because --amend _can_ mean that you change the diff of the commit. Maybe 'correct', 'redact' or 'rephrase'?

BTW I was not fully happy with 'edit' back then, either, which is the reason why I showed the usage in the comment _above_ the commit list. But nobody could suggest a name that I found convincingly better.

Ciao, Dscho