From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Paolo Bonzini Subject: Re: [PATCH] Changed timestamp behavior of options -c/-C/--amend Date: Sun, 01 Nov 2009 00:34:33 +0100 Message-ID: References: <1256931394-9338-1-git-send-email-erick.mattos@gmail.com> <20091030202628.GA26513@coredump.intra.peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sun Nov 01 00:36:21 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1N4NUb-00059E-6b for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Sun, 01 Nov 2009 00:36:21 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933340AbZJaXew (ORCPT ); Sat, 31 Oct 2009 19:34:52 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S933330AbZJaXew (ORCPT ); Sat, 31 Oct 2009 19:34:52 -0400 Received: from lo.gmane.org ([80.91.229.12]:41571 "EHLO lo.gmane.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933320AbZJaXew (ORCPT ); Sat, 31 Oct 2009 19:34:52 -0400 Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1N4NTD-0004gi-Se for git@vger.kernel.org; Sun, 01 Nov 2009 00:34:55 +0100 Received: from 85.93.118.17 ([85.93.118.17]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sun, 01 Nov 2009 00:34:55 +0100 Received: from bonzini by 85.93.118.17 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sun, 01 Nov 2009 00:34:55 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 85.93.118.17 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1.4pre) Gecko/20091014 Fedora/3.0-2.8.b4.fc11 Lightning/1.0pre Thunderbird/3.0b4 In-Reply-To: <20091030202628.GA26513@coredump.intra.peff.net> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: > So my suspicion is that there are some people who almost always want > --new-timestamp, and some people who almost always want --old-timestamp, > depending on their usual workflow. In which case a config option > probably makes the most sense (but keeping the command-line to override > the config, of course). I'd say the config option should be per-branch (so that you can set the old-timestamp option only in integration branches, and not in topic branches), and that with such an option you could make the default be --new-timestamp in all three cases. Paolo