The reason why I didn't want `-C' to be `--reuse-message' is:
1. it is a misleading long option name, and
2. some days ago the long option was not really documented,
so everyone and everything is using -C.
(See
git show bc47c29
and/or
git grep -e reuse-message
in git.git)
Yes, I agree (though I still maintain that --reuse-message is better if
only because it is more consistent).
-M <commit-ish>
--reuse-message=<commit-ish>::
Reuse message from specified commit.
Note, that only the commit message is reused
and not the authorship information.
This is something I'd like to keep.
Do you have a use case?
Later you speak of using the -e option to force edit of the message.
I think that "-c" is not needed if you can use "-C f00babe -e".
Well, so is for git-commit but...
Currently you can pass --author as a general option.
Perhaps this is not as easy to handle for the user, but if we
really really really want the -A/--author-override, we can add it later.
The idea is that -M = "-A -C ba123"...
Paolo
--
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
