Re: [RFC/PATCH] rebase--interactive: Add "sign" command

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Aug 3, 2016, 16:08 UTC
Message-ID: <xmqqr3a5al7z.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1608031621590.107993@virtualbox>

Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> writes:

> ... my Git garden shears [*1*] (essentially, what
> git rebase --interactive --preserve-merges *should* have been).

Any plan to fold it into "git rebase -i" as a new (improved) mode of operation, by the way?

> However, I could imagine that we actually want this to be more extensible.
> After all, all you are doing is to introduce a new rebase -i command that
> does nothing else than shelling out to a command.

Yup, I tend to agree.

Adding "sign" feature (i.e. make it pass -S to "commit [--amend]") may be a good thing, but adding "sign" command to do so is not a great design.

There is no inherent reason why "sign" feature implies "--no-edit", and adding a "sign" command like this patch means that the next command somebody else proposes will be "sign-and-reword".

We should be able to treat Signing and Rewording as two orthogonal features, one that passes -S, and the other that refrains from passing --no-edit. Otherwise as the number of features grow, the number of commands will see combinatorial growth.

Thanks.