On 07/05/2019 05:19, Junio C Hamano wrote:
The principle is "the bulk of the work was done in A, no matter what
is done incrementally by squashing in or amending small refinements;
the primary authorship date and time stays the same as the original".
When the person who is correcting other's change with --amend makes
a contribution that is substantial enough such that the amended HEAD
no longer resembles the original HEAD, there is a mechanism to let
the amender take authorship,
IIUC the effective change in authorship was noted in another thread
about a perceived problem in rebase, and it just bit me as well recently
(and the Github PR bot rejected my series for a mismatched
author/sign-off :-(.
If a commit is edited in a `rebase -i` then I think the same can happen,
resulting in the same user surprise at the change. Possibly a simple
documentation note may help reduce user surprise.
i.e. do this at the last step instead
$ git commit --reset-author --amend -a
in the second sequence. I do not think there currently is an
equivalent in "rebase -i" language to do so.
--
Philip
