Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > On Fri, May 6, 2016 at 6:16 PM, Pranit Bauva <pranit.bauva@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> [+cc:git@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] Because its an interesting fact to be shared >> which isn't covered elsewhere. >> >> On Fri, May 6, 2016 at 2:53 AM, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason >> <avarab@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> Sending this privately since it's probably covered elsewhere. With >>> this, if I set the option will "reword" in git rebase -i show me the >>> patch? >>> >>> If so: awesome. >> >> Yes, git rebase -i will show the diff in 'reword' if commit.verbose is >> set to true or a value greater than 0. >> >> I dug further in git-rebase--interactive.sh >> I could find appearances of "git commit --amend" but I was unable to >> find appearances of "COMMIT_EDITMSG". If COMMIT_EDITMSG was coming >> into picture, the commit.verbose could not affect it. And that is not >> the case. >> >> I guess this would be a desirable trait for most of the consumers of >> commit.verbose (like Ævar) so there would not be a need to suppress. > > Yeah it's great, it's something I've wanted from interactive rebase > for a while now. I can see why "commit -v" may be useful during "rebase -i", but we should also have rebase.verbose and "rebase -v". I do not want to make all my commits with -v, and I suspect I want to do "commit -v" more often during "rebase -i" than regular commit, for example. -- 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