Andrew Pimlott <> writes:

> Excerpts from Andrew Pimlott's message of Fri Jun 14 12:31:57 -0700 2013:
>> It happened to work and I added a test.  But then it occurred to me that
>> it might have been better to fix commit --fixup/--squash to strip the
>> fixup! or squash! from the referenced commit in the first place.
>> Anyhow, below is my patch for --autosquash, but unles someone has an
>> objection to doing it in commit, I'll work on that.

Is it always true that you would squash and fixup in the same order
as these follow-up commits happened?

That is, if you did this (time flows from top to bottom):

        1 A
        2 B
        3 fixup A
        4 squash B
        5 fixup fixup A
        6 fixup A

I am wondering if applying 6 on top of 5 is always what you want, or
you would want to apply it to 3 instead.  Otherwise you would have

        6 fixup fixup fixup A


The two reordering possibilities are:

        1 A                        1 A             
        3 fixup A                  3 fixup A       
        5 fixup fixup A            6 fixup A       
        6 fixup A                  5 fixup fixup A
        2 B                        2 B             
        4 squash B                 4 squash B      

If you strip out the prefix when you make commits, you may lose the
information if you want to use in order to express these different
orders.  I am not sure if it matters in practice, but I am not yet
convinced it is a good idea.

By the way, the message I am responding to is not something we can
apply. I am assuming these paches are for discussion-only; before
sending the final one, please check Documentation/SubmittingPatches.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at

Reply via email to