On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 12:46:45PM -0400, Andrew Wong wrote:
> > Just "edit" may be a bit misleading, as we already have the "edit"
> > action inside the todolist. I'd call this --edit-list to avoid
> > ambiguity.
>
> I thought that might be a bit confusing too. "--edit-list" doesn't
> seem informative about what "list" we're editing though. What about
> "--edit-todo"? Any suggestions are welcomed.
Does it ever make sense to edit and then _not_ immediately continue?
You can't affect the current commit anyway (it has already been pulled
from the todo list), so the next thing you'd want to do it actually act
on whatever you put into the todo list[1].
What if it was called --continue-with-edit or something, and then:
> > This lacks tests, IMHO, as there are many corner-cases (e.g. should we
> > be allowed to --edit-list while the worktree is in conflict?) that would
> > deserve to be at least discussed, and as much as possible automatically
> > tested.
We would not even allow the edit if we were not OK to continue.
-Peff
[1] It does preclude using "--edit" to make a note about a later commit
while you are in the middle of resolving a conflict or something.
You'd have to do it at the end. I don't know if anybody actually
cares about that.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html