On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 6:44 AM, <greened@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > >>> Remove --annotate. This obviates the need for an --unannotate >>> command. We really want a more generalized commit message rewrite >>> mechanism. >> >> That may be a good goal as the end result, but wouldn't it be a bit >> unhelpful to remove these before adding such a "more generalized" >> mechanism to replace them? > > I did think about that. I sent out an e-mail some time ago asking for > opinions on this. No one responded. Since this is in contrib/ I feel > comfortable getting rid of this option early so that people don't get > too attached to it. :) I don't agree that removing `--annotate` obviates the need for `--unannotate`. I responded on 1/17 with what I think is a typical and normal use case for that option: - add "fancylib" as a subtree of "myprog" - commit to "myprog" repo: "fancylib: don't crash as much" - split these commits back out to "fancylib" main repo, and remove the "fancylib: " prefix In my opinion this is a pretty normal workflow. Commits to "fancylib" in the "myprog" repo are prefixed with "fancylib: ", and that prefix becomes redundant and should be removed if those commits are split back out into the "fancylib" main repo. I also tried to come up with another situation that would justify a more general commit message rewriting facility, and I couldn't think of any other good use cases that don't involve removing a prefix. But that doesn't mean there aren't any. `--unannotate` is a clunky name, but I think this functionality is worth taking another look at. Maybe it could be called `--remove-prefix` ? -- 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