Hi Peff,

On Wed, 3 Aug 2016, Jeff King wrote:

> On Wed, Aug 03, 2016 at 09:08:48AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> > > 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.
> I'm not sure what you mean by "feature" here, but it reminded me of
> Michael's proposal to allow options to todo lines:
>   http://public-inbox.org/git/530da00e.4090...@alum.mit.edu/
> which would allow:
>   pick -S 1234abcd
> If that's what you meant, I think it is a good idea. :)

I looked at the code in git-rebase--interactive.sh again and stumbled over
something important: if you "pick" a commit, it *already* uses the
information provided to the rebase command via the -S option, *unless* the
pick fast-forwards.

That is, I came to believe that the "sign" command is unnecessary, and
that the --force-rebase option in conjunction with the -S option is what
should be used.

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

Reply via email to