On Thu, May 10, 2007 at 09:22:12PM CEST, J. Bruce Fields wrote: > On Thu, May 10, 2007 at 11:30:37AM -0700, Carl Worth wrote: > > stg - This probably works great if you're using it as a primary > > interface. But trying to use it as a quick one-off when > > generally using core git does not work well at all. Instead of > > the two "git tag" commands in my recipe above, an stg recipe > > would involve a lot of additional bookkeeping with stg init, stg > > uncommit [N times for fixing a commit N steps back in the > > history], stg goto, stg push, etc. > > I also didn't like having to come up with another name for each > patch--I'd rather just run git-log or gitk and cut-n-paste the sha1. Actually, you don't have to - if you don't specify the patch names, stgit will make them up itself using the subject of the commit message as a base. And by the way, I absolutely love that - when viewing the stack, it's very useful to see what commits you still have to go etc. - stg series is concise yet fully descriptive. I'm pondering about whether something like this couldn't be incorporated into other git UIs somehow as well. -- Petr "Pasky" Baudis Stuff: http://pasky.or.cz/ Ever try. Ever fail. No matter. // Try again. Fail again. Fail better. -- Samuel Beckett - 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
