<shameless plugs> On Mon, Aug 06, 2007 at 09:26:08AM -0400, Pavel Roskin wrote: > On Mon, 2007-08-06 at 10:49 +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote: > > > The story for the 'new -s' option was that with StGIT (not possible > > with Quilt), one can start modifying the local tree and only create a > > patch afterwards. > > And that's what I really like about StGIT. I like that I can edit code > without worrying (too much) about the state of the repository. guilt-new -f <patchname> > > The newly created patch is always empty, even if > > there were local changes and showing them was useful for writing the > > patch description. One can use refresh for checking the changes in. > > Indeed, the 'new' command can be improved to have part of the > > 'refresh' functionality, though I don't really like this duplication. > > It should be fine as long as the code is reused IMHO. Agreed. > > I think we should put some default patch description. > > I agree. Sometimes it's too early to write a description. If Guilt doesn't find a description in the patch file during push, it uses "patch $patchname" as the commit message. This makes it enough of an eye-sore that you notice before you submit the patches upstream :) Josef 'Jeff' Sipek. -- Failure is not an option, It comes bundled with your Microsoft product. - 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
