On Tue, Jan 1, 2013 at 5:31 PM,  <gree...@obbligato.org> wrote:
> Junio C Hamano <gits...@pobox.com> writes:
>> "David A. Greene" <gree...@obbligato.org> writes:
>>> From: James Nylen <jny...@gmail.com>
>>> Teach git-subtree about --unannotate.  This option strips a prefix
>>> from a commit message when doing a subtree split.
>> Hrm.  This looks like a workaround for a short-sighted misdesign of
>> the annotate option that only allowed prefixing a fixed string.  I
>> have to wonder if it is better to deprecate --annotate and replace
>> it with a more general "commit log rewriting" facility that can
>> cover both use cases?
> That's not a bad idea.  I'd have to think a bit about a sensible design.
> Do you have any ideas, James?

I just now saw these emails.  I'm having a hard time thinking of any
good use case other than:

 - add "fancylib" as a subtree of "myprog"
 - commit to myprog repo: "fancylib: don't crash as much"
 - split these commits back out to fancylib's main repo, and remove
the "fancylib: " prefix

You could potentially have something like "Don't crash as much
(fancylib)" but that's awkward.  What might you want to do with a
pattern-based rewrite that doesn't involve removing a prefix when
splitting commits?

In fact, I don't see the use of the original --annotate option at all,
since it causes more detailed commit messages in the smaller of the
two repositories.
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