From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Sven Verdoolaege Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] Add git-rewrite-commits Date: Sun, 08 Jul 2007 21:11:04 +0200 Message-ID: <20070708191104.GM1528MdfPADPa@greensroom.kotnet.org> References: <11839118073186-git-send-email-skimo@liacs.nl> <1183911808787-git-send-email-skimo@liacs.nl> <20070708173027.GK1528MdfPADPa@greensroom.kotnet.org> Reply-To: skimo@liacs.nl Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Junio C Hamano To: Johannes Schindelin X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sun Jul 08 21:11:11 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1I7cA2-0005Yb-Hs for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Sun, 08 Jul 2007 21:11:10 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755530AbXGHTLH (ORCPT ); Sun, 8 Jul 2007 15:11:07 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754839AbXGHTLH (ORCPT ); Sun, 8 Jul 2007 15:11:07 -0400 Received: from smtp13.wxs.nl ([195.121.247.4]:34172 "EHLO smtp13.wxs.nl" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754858AbXGHTLG (ORCPT ); Sun, 8 Jul 2007 15:11:06 -0400 Received: from greensroom.kotnet.org (ip54515aaa.direct-adsl.nl [84.81.90.170]) by smtp13.wxs.nl (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.15 (built Nov 14 2006)) with SMTP id <0JKV00MLNJYGVL@smtp13.wxs.nl> for git@vger.kernel.org; Sun, 08 Jul 2007 21:11:04 +0200 (CEST) Received: (qmail 5344 invoked by uid 500); Sun, 08 Jul 2007 19:11:04 +0000 In-reply-to: Content-disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.10i Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Sun, Jul 08, 2007 at 07:17:16PM +0100, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > On Sun, 8 Jul 2007, Sven Verdoolaege wrote: > > On Sun, Jul 08, 2007 at 05:37:22PM +0100, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > > > I am really unhappy that so much is talked about filtering out > > > commits. That is amost certainly not what you want in most cases. > > > In particular, I suspect that most users would expect the _changes_ > > > filtered out by such a command, which is just not true. > > > > I don't care about that either. I'm just mentioning it because it's > > mentioned in the git-filter-branch documentation (which you added). > > Which I copied. And this is not the first, let alone the only example in > filter-branch's documentation. All I'm saying is that you shouldn't blame me for doing something you have done yourself. And if you're not blaming me, but just making a general comment, then all I can say is that I agree with your comment. > However, this leaves things only in half-finished states. > > - "git filter-branch" did not learn the useful features that you seem to > need, and > > - your builtin is at most a start of a builtin replacement for > filter-branch, which changes the semantics, to be sure. > > I have no doubts that it will stay that way for a while, since this > builtin seems to be good enough for what you want it to do. If people find rewrite-commits useful, but think that something is missing, then I'd be willing to look into that. I'm personally not likely to work on fiter-branch, but maybe someone else, possibly inspired by rewrite-commits, will. But it is true that rewrite-commits does everything I want now. skimo