Re: [BUG?] "git rebase --interactive" forces me to edit message.

[Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>]

しらいしななこ  <nanako3@bluebottle.com> writes:

> But I started wondering (especially after read Junio's example) if you
> might have to stop and force edit the message even for commits you
> "pick", once you have a conflict.  The patch might not conflict, but
> with your logic shouldn't you be given a chance to amend messages, now
> it was discovered that the upstream did change that overlaps what you
> did?

[jc: again, linewrap X-<]

That may be true but at that point I would have to say that people should
always examine the resulting history anyway to see if they need to fix-up
mismerges (and mismerges do happen if the reordered patches have semantic
conflicts that do not appear as textual conflicts), and re-fix the
commits, perhaps using "rebase -i" on now linearlized history.  Forcing
every single patch to be committed by hand after a single conflict is
going a bit too far, I think.

Of course, you _can_ argue that forcing the patch that conflicted to be
committed by hand even when you merely asked to 'pick', not 'edit', is
going too far by the same logic, and I tend to agree with that.  The world
is not just black and white and that case certainly feels gray.