From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Johannes Sixt Subject: Re: Rebase/cherry-picking idea Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2007 13:51:02 +0100 Message-ID: <474AC136.8060906@viscovery.net> References: <109026BC-408F-451A-8F7C-A4012DD8DBDF@wincent.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: Benoit Sigoure , Git Mailing List To: Wincent Colaiuta X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon Nov 26 13:51:49 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1IwdQw-0007Nm-PE for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Mon, 26 Nov 2007 13:51:31 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753048AbXKZMvM convert rfc822-to-quoted-printable (ORCPT ); Mon, 26 Nov 2007 07:51:12 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753057AbXKZMvM (ORCPT ); Mon, 26 Nov 2007 07:51:12 -0500 Received: from lilzmailso02.liwest.at ([212.33.55.13]:48988 "EHLO lilzmailso02.liwest.at" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753048AbXKZMvL convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Mon, 26 Nov 2007 07:51:11 -0500 Received: from cm56-163-160.liwest.at ([86.56.163.160] helo=linz.eudaptics.com) by lilzmailso02.liwest.at with esmtpa (Exim 4.66) (envelope-from ) id 1IwdPu-0004YF-6V; Mon, 26 Nov 2007 13:50:27 +0100 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (J6T.linz.viscovery [192.168.1.42]) by linz.eudaptics.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 07AF36B7; Mon, 26 Nov 2007 13:51:02 +0100 (CET) User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728) In-Reply-To: X-Spam-Score: 1.7 (+) X-Spam-Report: ALL_TRUSTED=-1.8, BAYES_99=3.5 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Wincent Colaiuta schrieb: > El 26/11/2007, a las 12:27, Wincent Colaiuta escribi=F3: >> So I think that misleading noise needs to be suppressed or reworded=20 >> when rebasing. Will look into it. >=20 > How about something like this? It would obviously be nice if we could= =20 > avoid adding another option to builtin-revert; perhaps when/if=20 > git-rebase becomes a builtin we can avoid that. The other alternative= ,=20 > and probably one I like I bit more, would be to auto-detect that a=20 > rebase is in progress by looking inside the GIT_DIR, although that wo= uld=20 > also alter the behaviour of manual invocations of git-revert and=20 > git-cherry-pick during an interactive rebase (do people actually do=20 > that?). What do you think? Introduce an environment variable _GIT_CHERRY_PICK_HELP (note the leadi= ng=20 underscore), which git-rebase sets; if it's set, git-cherry-pick uses t= hat=20 text instead of the usual one. -- Hannes