On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 12:11:58PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Jeff King <p...@peff.net> writes: > > > But even without that, I still think format-patch is a reasonable time > > to do it. It is the time when I proof-read my commit message and patch > > in its final form, and think "do I really want to send this?". > > But it is not like "I cannot sign off because I think it is still > iffy".
No, that is not the particular reason in my case, but I think I explained other reasons why "format-patch -s" is not a wrong workflow. > >> But your point still stands; "commit -s" will not see through that > >> official trick either ;-). > > > > Yes. :) > > Actually, no. "commit -s" does not have any need to see through it. > > ... hack hack hack ... > $ git commit -a -s > ... editor opens, you see your Sign-off at the end, with > ... the cursor sitting on the first line > ... edit the title, move to the line below the Sign-off, > ... and do the "---\n\n * comment" thing. > > And this survives "rebase -i" (but not "format-patch | am" for > obvious reasons). Yes, if your particular workflow is to signoff the very first time you commit. But it would not work for: ... hack hack hack ... $ git commit -a ... make a note after "---" ... ... hack hack hack ... ... OK, looks good, ready to signoff ... $ git commit --amend -s So it can work, but it is workflow dependent, and in general is a little flaky with the automagic signoff. You may want to signoff later for a variety of reasons, not the least of which is that you forgot to type "-s" the first time. > So I take it back. The time you do the "git commit" for the very > first time for this change that may need to be rerolled number of > times is the right time to say "-s". If you remember to type it. :) -Peff -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
