Stephan Beyer <s-beyer@xxxxxxx> wrote: > Shawn O. Pearce wrote: > > > It probably is better to fix "rebase -i" to share more code with the main > > > "rebase" script to avoid duplicated run-pre-rebase-hook function, but it > > > is beyond what I can do right now. Perhaps people more smart and > > > beautiful than me can help (^_^;) > > > > True. But its already a mess. git-sequencer is probably the > > right approach to merge it all together. > > Hmm, I don't think I like the pre-rebase hook in sequencer. The user > scripts (git-rebase--interactive.sh and git-rebase.sh) should run them; > that's ok. Sorry, my remark wasn't about the rebase hook as much as it was that there is a good chunk of code duplicated between the two rebase implementations and all of them were implemented through git-sequencer its likely they could all collapse into a single common "git rebase" wrapper script which just sets up the call to git-sequencer. So yea, I do agree, the pre-rebase hook should be in rebase, not git-sequencer, but git-sequencer probably offers a great way to get the different rebase implementations combined together. > I think, for the moment it is ok to have the code duplicated. After > sequencer has merged into master[1], I will probably take a look at > merging git-rebase.sh and git-rebase--interactive.sh if somebody > else is interested in it and if there is a good way to achieve that. Yup, exactly my thoughts. I just didn't express them well. -- Shawn. -- 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
