From: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Date: Mon, 05 Oct 2009 09:17:49 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Teach 'rebase -i' the command "amend"
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.1.00.0910051116480.4985@pacific.mpi-cbg.de>
In-Reply-To: <6672d0160910042308v7280dcadyff97b977bcfe12c3@mail.gmail.com>

Hi,

On Mon, 5 Oct 2009, Björn Gustavsson wrote:

> 2009/10/4 Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de>:
> > I thought that we had a discussion about this and that the consensus was
> > that "amend" would be misleading.  Maybe you can find that thread in
> > GMane?
> 
> I found this thread from January 2009:
> 
> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/105738
> 
> Having read the thread, I agree that "amend" would be misleading.
> 
> There were several suggestions for alternate command names
> in that thread, for example:
> 
> "msg", "msgedit", "message", "reword", "rephrase"
> 
> It think that "msgedit" was suggested by several people. ("editmsg"
> was also suggested, but it is not possible as the abbreviation "e" would
> become ambiguous.)
> 
> Would the patch have a chance to be accepted if I renamed
> the new command to "msgedit"?

My objection was that the "upcoming" (yeah, Sverre, I am imitating Duke 
Nukem Forever here) "merge" command would clash with "msgedit", which was 
why I suggested "rephrase" (but would be okay with "reword" Junio 
mentions).

AFAIR the naming was the only objection.

Ciao,
Dscho