From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.9 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI, RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 898BD20A17 for ; Mon, 23 Jan 2017 20:17:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750957AbdAWUQu (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Jan 2017 15:16:50 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com ([64.147.108.71]:63218 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750705AbdAWUQt (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Jan 2017 15:16:49 -0500 Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 26B6B63854; Mon, 23 Jan 2017 15:16:48 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=Djd9HCS2EpFdN699M30JQ9nS6AY=; b=McoAbq llqCcB40g2oiw6Ag/+l/V9qOEE/L/bCKuFzpkf6pebmQHG9YyD7WyaEMsUkZUIiO wUMVj0KI4QDMVnvVrxl/OAnIT7wZyFyfos5txt+W0LlkMGHlqSwYnyqbTsgjtZsn L07ooTUu0BeGTa0UAKNulI4Ii6bZZGNgJDx/A= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=UJqfnJxz0wBgf3cnOxJ7VTxDWqNyd2Mk oegvr/B2+rEbTjDH0wCt0XXMk1iCZ+Dcvz2a94RX/JCFPmeKgB94BOj+j9om7+Fq pDmRLmzjr4XI+/jygbY9IrRfBkCa9ty+F/WYKc13Tn3t6iuS/MmtoZhGhIcLx5UA xKKBotMX4VA= Received: from pb-smtp2.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1EE3063853; Mon, 23 Jan 2017 15:16:48 -0500 (EST) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [104.132.0.95]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7DF3663852; Mon, 23 Jan 2017 15:16:47 -0500 (EST) From: Junio C Hamano To: Giuseppe Bilotta Cc: Git List Subject: Re: [PATCH] rebase: pass --signoff option to git am References: <20170121104904.15132-1-giuseppe.bilotta@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2017 12:16:46 -0800 In-Reply-To: (Giuseppe Bilotta's message of "Mon, 23 Jan 2017 21:03:33 +0100") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.1.91 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: DDEB4286-E1A8-11E6-86E6-A7617B1B28F4-77302942!pb-smtp2.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Giuseppe Bilotta writes: > On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 7:13 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: >> >> Should we plan to extend this to the interactive backend that is >> shared between rebase -i and rebase -m, too? Or is this patch >> already sufficient to cover them? > > AFAIK this is sufficient for both, in the sense that I've used it with > git rebase -i and it works. That is a good news and at the same time a bit awkard one ;-) The mention of "passed to 'git am'" twice in the documentation and help text would lead people to think "rebase -i" would not be affected and (1) would need more work to do so, or (2) the user does not want "rebase -i" to be unaffected for whatever reason, and gets surprised to see that it actually does get affected. In any case, will queue as-is so that we won't lose the patch while waiting for people to raise their opinions. Thanks.