On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 09:32:48AM +0100, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > > > Would it not make more sense to add a command-line option (and a config > > > setting) to re-schedule failed `exec` commands? Like so: > > > > Your proposition would do in most cases, however it is not possible to > > make a distinction between reschedulable and non-reschedulable commands. > > True. But I don't think that's so terrible. > > What I think is something to avoid is two commands that do something very, > very similar, but with two very, very different names. > > In reality, I think that it would even make sense to change the default to > reschedule failed `exec` commands. Which is why I suggested to also add a > config option. I sometimes add "x false" to the top of the todo list to stop and create new commits before the first one. That would be awkward if I could never get past that line. However, I think elsewhere a "pause" line has been discussed, which would serve the same purpose. I wonder how often this kind of "yes, I know it fails, but keep going anyway" situation would come up. And what the interface is like for getting past it. E.g., what if you fixed a bunch of stuff but your tests still fail? You may not want to abandon the changes you've made, but you need to "rebase --continue" to move forward. I encounter this often when the correct fix is actually in an earlier commit than the one that yields the test failure. You can't rewind an interactive rebase, so I complete and restart it, adding an "e"dit at the earlier commit. How would I move past the test that fails to continue? I guess "git rebase --edit-todo" and then manually remove it (and any other remaining test lines)? That's not too bad, but I wonder if people would find it more awkward than the current way (which is to just "rebase --continue" until you get to the end). I dunno. I am not sure if I am for or against changing the default, so these are just some musings. :) -Peff
