Re: [PATCH] Changed timestamp behavior of options -c/-C/--amend

[Erick Mattos <erick.mattos@gmail.com>]

2009/10/30 Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>:
> Erick Mattos <erick.mattos@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> 2009/10/30 Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>:
>>> Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> ...
>>>> I agree that the issue the patch addresses is worth improving, and I think
>>>> it is sensible to default to reuse the timestamp for -C and not to reuse
>>>> for --amend.  I am not sure about -c myself, but it probably shouldn't
>>>> reuse the timestamp by default.
>>>
>>> So after realizing that this was about "author" timestamp, I am rescinding
>>> this comment about the change of the default for -c and --amend.
>>
>> Actually I am only changing the default for -c and I see it useful.
>> At least with me I normally use -c only to use messages of commits as
>> template.
>
> I do that from time to time as well.  As I said in a different message, it
> may make the default more intutitive if we give new timestamp when the
> author is the same as the committer when doing "-c".  You are creating
> your own commit in that case.
>

I don't see a use for comparing the author and committer because I can
use as template my own commits or others'.

Let's clarify the subject:

In my point-of-view -c option is mainly used for templating commit messages.
In that case -c has a different default from -C and --amend options
thus creating a need for two new options: --reuse-timestamp and
--no-reuse-timestamp.

As I see by your messages you do prefer to have all those options set
up for reusing timestamp as default.
In that case we just need one new option: --no-reuse-timestamp (or
--recreate-timestamp or whatever).

So now It is a matter of decision only and you are the guy.

What should be for all?