From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Johannes Schindelin Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] Add git-rewrite-commits Date: Sun, 8 Jul 2007 19:17:16 +0100 (BST) Message-ID: References: <11839118073186-git-send-email-skimo@liacs.nl> <1183911808787-git-send-email-skimo@liacs.nl> <20070708173027.GK1528MdfPADPa@greensroom.kotnet.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Junio C Hamano To: skimo@liacs.nl X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sun Jul 08 20:24:50 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 1I7bR8-000760-Iu for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Sun, 08 Jul 2007 20:24:46 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753331AbXGHSYo (ORCPT ); Sun, 8 Jul 2007 14:24:44 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753414AbXGHSYo (ORCPT ); Sun, 8 Jul 2007 14:24:44 -0400 Received: from mail.gmx.net ([213.165.64.20]:38354 "HELO mail.gmx.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1753098AbXGHSYn (ORCPT ); Sun, 8 Jul 2007 14:24:43 -0400 Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 08 Jul 2007 18:24:42 -0000 Received: from wbgn013.biozentrum.uni-wuerzburg.de (EHLO localhost) [132.187.25.13] by mail.gmx.net (mp055) with SMTP; 08 Jul 2007 20:24:42 +0200 X-Authenticated: #1490710 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX18qld8CUQwqmbKf2Ng4tCGgLBwKdyj7Slzq4FfXce 4PhklUpq49Y8Lh X-X-Sender: gene099@racer.site In-Reply-To: <20070708173027.GK1528MdfPADPa@greensroom.kotnet.org> X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Hi, On Sun, 8 Jul 2007, Sven Verdoolaege wrote: > On Sun, Jul 08, 2007 at 05:37:22PM +0100, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > > That is to be expected. After all, the first is a script. However, I > > really have ask: how often per hour do you want to run that program? > > I have a project that needs some cleaning-up and I'd like to do it > incrementally. I think I'll have to run it about a dozen times. A dozen times seems not that bad, especially since you can run both programs on a limited set of commits. So the cost is not that big. > > 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. > > The second is to rewrite the commit messages so that the hashes are > > mapped, too. But that should be relatively easy, too: you can provide > > a message filter, and you can use the provided "map" function. If > > this seems to be what many people need, you can write a simple > > function and put it into filter-branch for common use. > > It's not going to be me (as I sais, I don't like shell programming). Yes, you made that clear. 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. Ciao, Dscho