On 2007-08-06 10:36:25 +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> On 03/08/2007, Pavel Roskin <proski@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > Another approach would be to reexamine the patch after "stg
> > refresh -es" and to apply it instead of the original patch. If the
> > patch doesn't apply, the options would be to discard the edits or
> > to re-launch the editor.
>
> That's an interesting idea but maybe we should have a separate
> command like --edit-full to edit the full patch + log (part of the
> functionality already available in import).
I never really understood why commit message editing had to be part of
the "refresh" command. If it were a separate command and not tied to
refresh, we could allow editing the message (and author, committer,
date, ...) of any commit in the stack -- since the tree objects would
be unchanged, we could just reuse the same tree objects when rewriting
the commit objects on top of it.
That's obviously not going to work if we allow editing of the patch.
But patch editing isn't a good fit as a refresh switch either, since
it's not at all related to replacing the tree of the current patch
with the working tree.
--
Karl Hasselström, kha@xxxxxxxxxxx
www.treskal.com/kalle
-
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
