On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 1:24 PM, Philip Oakley <philipoakley@xxxxxxx> wrote: > From: "Jacob Keller" <jacob.keller@xxxxxxxxx> > >> On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 7:35 AM, Johannes Schindelin >> <johannes.schindelin@xxxxxx> wrote: >>> >>> This commit implements the commands to label, and to reset to, given >>> revisions. The syntax is: >>> >>> label <name> >>> reset <name> >>> >>> As a convenience shortcut, also to improve readability of the generated >>> todo list, a third command is introduced: bud. It simply resets to the >>> "onto" revision, i.e. the commit onto which we currently rebase. >>> >> >> The code looks good, but I'm a little wary of adding bud which >> hard-codes a specific label. I suppose it does grant a bit of >> readability to the resulting script... ? It doesn't seem that >> important compared to use using "reset onto"? At least when >> documenting this it should be made clear that the "onto" label is >> special. >> >> Thanks, >> Jake. > > > I'd agree. > > The special 'onto' label should be fully documented, and the commit message > should indicate which patch actually defines it (and all its corner cases > and fall backs if --onto isn't explicitly given..) I don't think it actually relates to "--onto" but rather to simply using "label onto" in your sequencer script allows bud to work, and simply shortens the overall work necessary. It's equivalent to "reset onto" if I understand. > > Likewise the choice of 'bud' should be explained with some nice phraseology > indicating that we are growing the new flowering from the bud, otherwise the > word is a bit too short and sudden for easy explanation. > > Philip
