On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 11:30:53AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> > This case collapses nicely if we make a slight tweak to your proposed
> > behavior (or maybe this is what you meant). If there are multiple
> > authors listed, we behave as if none was listed. That would leave the
> > authorship a
Jeff King writes:
> On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 03:32:37PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
>> > It also raises a question for the proposal in this thread: if there are
>> > multiple "Author:" lines, which one do we take? The first, or the last?
>>
>> I was siding with David's "pay attention to in-buf
On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 03:32:37PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> > and using "Author: " (with no text) does a reset.
>
> no (I do not think it is wrong per-se, but I do not think such a
> good idea).
Fair enough. It is probably a minority use case, and one that is likely
to cause confusion.
>
On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 4:17 PM, David Glasser wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 2:34 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> David Glasser writes:
>>
>>> So to be concrete: What I'm proposing (and I'm excited to implement
>>> it!) is the following:
>>>
>>> When running "git commit" and:
>>> - You've fallen
On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 2:34 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> David Glasser writes:
>
>> So to be concrete: What I'm proposing (and I'm excited to implement
>> it!) is the following:
>>
>> When running "git commit" and:
>> - You've fallen into the case where the message was read from SQUASH_MSG
>> - Y
Jeff King writes:
> What happens if there is no "Author:" line in the output?
I've been assuming that we would do what the current code does.
"git commit --amend" for example internally remembers who the
original author was and uses that, without paying any attention to
the result from the edito
On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 02:34:43PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> I actually was hoping that this would extend to cases other than
> "git merge --squash".
>
> When running "git commit" and:
>
> - You didn't use a more explicit method of specifying the
>authorship identity (--author, --date,
David Glasser writes:
> So to be concrete: What I'm proposing (and I'm excited to implement
> it!) is the following:
>
> When running "git commit" and:
> - You've fallen into the case where the message was read from SQUASH_MSG
> - You haven't used another method of specifying the author (--author
On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 2:16 PM, David Glasser wrote:
> - Before invoking prepare-commit-msg, all of the `Author:` lines found
> in SQUASH_MSG have the same value
OK, and to be very specific: I'm just proposing "literally the same
text written after Author"; using mailmap to detect that multipl
On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 1:23 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> David Glasser writes:
>
>> Well, using -c appears to override SQUASH_MSG entirely; it replaces
>> the message as well as the author. Often I do want to make my own
>> message based on all the messages provided by the submitter. (And
>> ty
David Glasser writes:
> Well, using -c appears to override SQUASH_MSG entirely; it replaces
> the message as well as the author. Often I do want to make my own
> message based on all the messages provided by the submitter. (And
> typically the branch's tip is the least useful message anyway: it
On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 12:18 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Jeff King writes:
>
>> On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 09:21:04AM -0800, David Glasser wrote:
>>
>>> (I'm not sure if this should be a flag to --squash or to commit.
>>> Maybe `git merge --squash`; `git commit --use-squashed-author`? Seems
>>> li
Jeff King writes:
> On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 09:21:04AM -0800, David Glasser wrote:
>
>> (I'm not sure if this should be a flag to --squash or to commit.
>> Maybe `git merge --squash`; `git commit --use-squashed-author`? Seems
>> like it should be not too hard to implement; SQUASH_MSG is pretty
>
On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 4:12 AM, Jeff King wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 12:35:48PM +0100, Michael Haggerty wrote:
>
>> > I assume you are already munging in your editor the template provided by
>> > "git commit" after the squash? What would be really nice, IMHO, is if
>> > there was a way to s
On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 12:35:48PM +0100, Michael Haggerty wrote:
> > I assume you are already munging in your editor the template provided by
> > "git commit" after the squash? What would be really nice, IMHO, is if
> > there was a way to set the author during that edit (e.g., by moving one
> > o
On 02/12/2015 10:28 AM, Jeff King wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 09:21:04AM -0800, David Glasser wrote:
>
>> (I'm not sure if this should be a flag to --squash or to commit.
>> Maybe `git merge --squash`; `git commit --use-squashed-author`? Seems
>> like it should be not too hard to implement;
On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 09:21:04AM -0800, David Glasser wrote:
> (I'm not sure if this should be a flag to --squash or to commit.
> Maybe `git merge --squash`; `git commit --use-squashed-author`? Seems
> like it should be not too hard to implement; SQUASH_MSG is pretty
> parseable. Or just a con
I frequently find myself using `git merge --squash` to combine a
series of commits by the same author into one.
(For example, I fetch my project's GitHub PRs into my repo.
Frequently, a PR consists of the original PR (with a good description)
followed by a few follow-ups based on feedback from me.
18 matches
Mail list logo
