On 7/23/08, Dmitry Potapov <dpotapov@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 06:22:34PM -0400, Avery Pennarun wrote: > > This patch is perhaps a symptom of something I've been meaning to ask > > about for a while. > > > > Why doesn't "edit" just stage the commit and not auto-commit it at > > all? That way an amend would *never* be necessary, and rebase > > --continue would always do a commit -a (if there was anything left to > > commit). > > Actually, it would be better to refuse to continue if there are unstaged > changes in the work tree, and if all changes are staged then just do git > commit. I'm not sure about that. The auto-committing on --continue has never annoyed me, and in fact I greatly appreciate that I can just "git rebase --continue" after making changes and the expected thing will happen. After all, if I screw it up and commit too much at once, I can always just rebase one more time. However, taking out the auto-commit wouldn't pain me too much if others want it that way. It would be somewhat more typing, but at least makes easy to understand exactly what's going on. > It would not only save typing, but also help to avoid costly mistakes > where users, being taught to use "git commit --amend" after editing > during git-rebase, fire this command automatically after a conflict > resolution and get two commits accidently squashed. Yes! Good point. I forgot about this, but I've been bitten by it a couple of times. Have fun, Avery -- 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
