On Tue, Mar 4, 2014 at 3:28 AM, Eric Sunshine <sunshine@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Sat, Mar 1, 2014 at 9:53 PM, Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclouds@xxxxxxxxx> 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.. -- Duy -- 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