SZEDER Gábor <szeder@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> I think we might want do differentiate editing a commit (modifying
> either the commit message or the patch or both) or splitting a commit.
>
> The first is served well with the current 'edit' rebase command IMHO.
> I don't really see the point of the additional 'git reset --soft
> HEAD^'.
>
> * If you want to edit the commit message only, then you are
> better off with 'git commit --amend', because it preserves the
> previous commit message. But with 'git reset --soft HEAD^' and
> 'git commit' the commit message is "lost"; you have to use 'git
> commit -c ORIG_HEAD' instead, which is not that straightforward
> (and we don't have completion support for it).
I agree that is a true disadvantage that shows "reset --soft HEAD^" is a
bad idea (you could still say commit -c @{1}, though).
> For the second we could introduce a new rebase command like 'split',
> which would do the same as 'edit' but would also perform that 'git
> reset HEAD^' mentioned in the documentation automatically.
Perhaps.
--
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
