From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Subject: Re: Feature idea: git rebase --exec $CMD Date: Wed, 23 May 2012 10:12:08 -0500 Message-ID: References: <20120505132650.637c4e06086654e0dbf641fc@studenti.unina.it> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Cc: , Matthieu Moy To: Antonio Ospite X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed May 23 17:12:30 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1SXDEg-0007wX-Ld for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Wed, 23 May 2012 17:12:27 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933670Ab2EWPMT (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 May 2012 11:12:19 -0400 Received: from exprod6og101.obsmtp.com ([64.18.1.181]:51171 "EHLO exprod6og101.obsmtp.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932692Ab2EWPMR (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 May 2012 11:12:17 -0400 Received: from CFWEX01.americas.cray.com ([136.162.34.11]) (using TLSv1) by exprod6ob101.postini.com ([64.18.5.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKT7z+TJyXTv9VdQw2od4rEfBg6B8x3xwn@postini.com; Wed, 23 May 2012 08:12:17 PDT Received: from transit.us.cray.com (172.31.17.53) by CFWEX01.americas.cray.com (172.30.88.25) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.2.247.3; Wed, 23 May 2012 10:12:11 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20120505132650.637c4e06086654e0dbf641fc@studenti.unina.it> (Antonio Ospite's message of "Sat, 5 May 2012 13:26:50 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Antonio Ospite writes: > I find the x/exec function in "git rebase -i" very useful, but it may > be tedious to edit the commit list to add something like "make test" > after each commit. I've taken a more general approach inspired by run-command-on-git-revisions at https://github.com/garybernhardt/dotfiles/tree/master/bin I took that and turned it into a git-run-command subcommand. It will take an arbitrary command and run it on each revision specified by a revlist. I think that's a more flexible approach than tying it to rebase. Thoughts? -Dave