Hi Christian, > De: "Christian Couder" <christian.couder@xxxxxxxxx> > À: "Yann Dirson" <ydirson@xxxxxxx> > Cc: "git" <git@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Envoyé: Lundi 22 Mars 2021 09:49:23 > Objet: Re: [RFC] git-rebase-rewind, nested rebases, remembering stgit > > Hi Yann, > > Nice to hear from you on the list! > > On Sat, Mar 13, 2021 at 5:45 PM <ydirson@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > Hello there, > > > > I often find myself doing iterative refactorings, which can lead to > > long branches, and while rebasing to edit HEAD~10 realize that I > > first > > need to edit HEAD~20 or to add more commits below that stack. > > > > If you've used stgit when it was a thing, you probably see how it > > helped doing that. While git-rebase has grown to do much more than > > stgit in most areas, this is still one area where with a pain point > > for me. > > > > Here is a small git-rebase-rewind script I've been using for a few > > weeks, > > starting with my most common use-case: automate worklow "edit > > git-rebase-todo > > to prepend 'pick' commands for the N previous commits, then reset > > --hard HEAD~N". > > > > As you will see from the new needs revealed by using this script > > (see in the > > script header), I believe it would be valuable to integrate such a > > mechanism > > directly into git-rebase. Notably, "git rebase -i" itself can be > > seen as a > > form of rewind, and this rewind feature would benefit from all the > > interactive > > rebase work. > > > > Does that sound like reasonable premises ? > > Sorry for the late answer. It sounds reasonable to me. > > It looks to me like a way to restart the whole interactive rebase > process though, so I wonder if calling it "--restart" would be better > than "--rewind". Right, it is indeed like doing another interactive rebase while the current one is not finished. Maybe just running "rebase -i" without more option could be sufficient ? That could break the expectation when someone relies on rebase refusing to proceed while already rebasing, though it could be mitigated if a "rebase --abort" just aborts the most recent rebase. There are quite a few UI issues to be thought through around here :)
