From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: git rebase interactive: usability issue Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2008 20:32:04 -0700 Message-ID: <7vbq1ovpl7.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> References: <20080625233208.GE5737@dpotapov.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Dmitry Potapov , git@vger.kernel.org To: Johannes Schindelin X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Jun 26 05:33:57 2008 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 1KBiF9-0001uW-9Y for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Thu, 26 Jun 2008 05:33:55 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752578AbYFZDcX (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Jun 2008 23:32:23 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752258AbYFZDcX (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Jun 2008 23:32:23 -0400 Received: from a-sasl-fastnet.sasl.smtp.pobox.com ([207.106.133.19]:64934 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751999AbYFZDcX (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Jun 2008 23:32:23 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a-sasl-fastnet.sasl.smtp.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E695D7BE; Wed, 25 Jun 2008 23:32:18 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pobox.com (ip68-225-240-77.oc.oc.cox.net [68.225.240.77]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by a-sasl-fastnet.sasl.smtp.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8FCE1D7BC; Wed, 25 Jun 2008 23:32:12 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: (Johannes Schindelin's message of "Thu, 26 Jun 2008 04:17:55 +0200 (CEST)") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 7A8A53B4-4330-11DD-A7DA-CE28B26B55AE-77302942!a-sasl-fastnet.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Johannes Schindelin writes: > NACK. > > You just broke the 'edit' command. Really? I thought it would be Ok for "edit" command. The patch checks the presense of /amend and complains only if it does not exist, while you create /amend when you respond to "edit" insn. I was relunctant about the patch not because of "edit", but because I am not convinced that it will _never_ make sense to be able to amend while the sequence stops with a conflict (as the patch does not give us any way to override this rather heavy-handed denial to continue). I also was hoping that with enough hooks git-commit already calls, this could have been experimented and implemented with hooks without touching C layer at least initially, while people can convince themselves that the approach is sane (i.e. it _never_ makes sense to do amend upon conflict).