On Tue, Mar 4, 2014 at 3:28 AM, Eric Sunshine <sunsh...@sunshineco.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 1, 2014 at 9:53 PM, Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclo...@gmail.com> 
> wrote:
>> "git rebase -e XYZ" is basically the same as
>> EDITOR="sed -i '1s/pick XYZ/edit XYZ/' $@" \
>> git rebase -i XYZ^
>> In English, it prepares the todo list for you to edit only commit XYZ
>> to save your time. The time saving is only significant when you edit a
>> lot of commits separately.
> Is it correct to single out only "edit" for special treatment? If
> allowing "edit" on the command-line, then shouldn't command-line
> "reword" also be supported? I, for one, often need to reword a commit
> message (or two or three); far more frequently than I need to edit a
> commit.
> (This is a genuine question about perceived favoritism of "edit", as
> opposed to a request to further bloat the interface.)

Heh I had the same thought yesterday. The same thing could be asked
for "git commit --fixup" to send us back to the fixed up commit so we
can do something about it. If we go along that line, then "git commit"
may be a better interface to reword older commits..
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