Re: [PATCH RFC 1/2] builtin/history: abort reword on unchanged message

> El lun, 8 jun 2026 a las 14:16, Junio C Hamano (<gitster@pobox.com>) escribió:
>>
> [snip]
>>
>> `git rebase -i` may have an excuse that because it, unlike "git
>> commit --amend", operates on multiple commits by design.  A single
>> "--force" option given to the command would not have worked as an
>> escape hatch to allow the user to tell the command "in this reword
>> of this particular commit, I ended up doing nothing, but I still
>> want an updated committer log timestamp".  Perhaps giving the
>> "--force" (or --force-rewrite") option at "rebase --continue" time
>> may work, but in any case, unless we plan to transition to these
>> "better" default behaviour at a big version boundary, speculating
>> what a "better" behaviour would have been may be fun but not very
>> productive.
>>
>>
>> [Footnote]
>>
>>  *1* Besides, doesn't "--update-refs" in "rebase -i" allow you to
>>      adjust the branches?
>>
>>  *2* But it is an established behaviour people _rely_ on, so even
>>      though it may have been better if these commands behaved
>>      differently, it probably is a bit too late to change it now.
>>
>>  *3* This includes the case where the original author is especially
>>      difficult to work with and would complain any change to their
>>      commits, even if the only change you made for them is a
>>      typofix.  Fixing a small typo/grammo may not be worth your time
>>      and unpleasant exchanges with them after touching their commit.
>
>[snip]
>
> About the --force sounds good to me. I could seek to implement it in
> this series if it's ok.