Re: [PATCH] commit: inform pre-commit if --amend is used

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes:

>   1. It is a bit more obvious when debugging or dumping arguments (e.g.,
>      via GIT_TRACE), especially if new options are added after the
>      first.
>
>   2. It makes it easier for a script to work on old and new versions of
>      git. It sees either "amend" or "noamend" for the two obvious cases,
>      and if it sees no argument, then it knows that it does not know
>      either way (it is running on an old version of git).
>
>      Technically one can tell the difference in shell between an empty
>      string and a missing argument, but it is sufficiently subtle that I
>      think "noamend" is a better route.

If we ever add more info, would we want to keep piling on new
arguments, though?  Wouldn't it a viable option to use "amend" vs
not giving anything (not even an empty string), so that normal case
there won't be no parameter?
--
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




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]