From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
To: Samuel Abraham <abrahamadekunle50@gmail.com>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, "Patrick Steinhardt" <ps@pks.im>,
"Phillip Wood" <phillip.wood123@gmail.com>,
"SZEDER Gábor" <szeder.dev@gmail.com>,
"Christian Couder" <christian.couder@gmail.com>,
"Kristoffer Haugsbakk" <kristofferhaugsbakk@fastmail.com>,
"Ben Knoble" <ben.knoble@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] Allow reworking with a file after deciding on all its hunks
Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2026 09:26:28 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <xmqqzf5rys3f.fsf@gitster.g> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CADYq+fZFuvCRbFf=-XUR8TJsjW_YtjNdiXMzPv0mjMPbWcLO1g@mail.gmail.com> (Samuel Abraham's message of "Mon, 2 Feb 2026 12:14:16 +0100")
Samuel Abraham <abrahamadekunle50@gmail.com> writes:
>> I am not sure if I would like the end result or rather prefer your
>> "all-or-none", so please do not take this as "here is a better way
>> to implement it" suggestion.
>>
>> But you should be able to keep the current semantics, if you wanted
>> to, even if you apply the chosen hunks when you switch files, like
>> the original code has been doing forever since it was written. You
>> know which hunks you applied, so after applying before moving on to
>> the next file, you can drop these hunks from the list of hunks to be
>> decided for application. When the user comes back to the current
>> file to decide on other hunks, you know that the already used hunks
>> would get in the way, so why keep them?
>
> Yes thank you so much for suggesting this approach.
Not so fast. I explicitly said I am *NOT* suggesting anything.
And thinking about it more, I do not think it makes any sense to do
anything other than "all-or-none" when the command is working in
your new "you can move to different files before you decide on all
hunks in the current file" mode (which I think we agreed to make it
an optional mode). Why? After deciding yes, no, no among 5 hunks
in the first file (leaving the hunks #4 and #5 undecided), you jump
to the second file, do something there, and imagine that you come
back. If we drop the alrady applied hunks like the suggestion,
which I did not make ;-), we'd then give you four hunks (as hunk #1
has been already applied), and even though you have already decided
not to use hunks #2 and #3, you *can* revisit them with "J" or "K",
change your mind and use them if you wanted to. But it is too late
for the hunk #1. It looks utterly inconsistent if you cannot change
your mind on hunk #1 but can on hunks #2 and #3 and it reduces the
usefulness of "you do not have to decide right now and visit other
files before you do so" mode.
Thanks.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-02-02 17:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 54+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-01-23 11:56 [RFC PATCH 0/1] add-patch: Allow reworking with a file after deciding on its hunks Abraham Samuel Adekunle
2026-01-23 11:58 ` [RFC PATCH 1/1] add-patch: Allow reworking with a file after deciding on all " Abraham Samuel Adekunle
2026-01-23 16:38 ` Junio C Hamano
2026-01-23 21:43 ` Samuel Abraham
2026-01-27 15:43 ` [PATCH v2 0/1] Allow reworking with a file when making hunk decisions Abraham Samuel Adekunle
2026-01-27 15:45 ` [PATCH v2 1/1] Allow reworking with a file after deciding on all its hunks Abraham Samuel Adekunle
2026-01-27 20:48 ` Junio C Hamano
2026-01-28 11:26 ` Samuel Abraham
2026-01-30 9:22 ` Samuel Abraham
2026-01-30 16:29 ` Junio C Hamano
2026-01-30 17:36 ` Samuel Abraham
2026-01-31 19:25 ` Junio C Hamano
2026-02-02 11:14 ` Samuel Abraham
2026-02-02 17:26 ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
2026-02-03 9:55 ` Samuel Abraham
2026-01-27 17:04 ` [PATCH v2 0/1] Allow reworking with a file when making hunk decisions Junio C Hamano
2026-01-28 9:49 ` Samuel Abraham
2026-02-06 15:52 ` [PATCH v3 0/3] introduce new option `rework-with-file` Abraham Samuel Adekunle
2026-02-06 15:54 ` [PATCH v3 1/3] interactive -p: add new `--rework-with-file` flag to interactive machinery Abraham Samuel Adekunle
2026-02-06 18:25 ` Junio C Hamano
2026-02-06 20:21 ` Samuel Abraham
2026-02-06 15:56 ` [PATCH v3 2/3] add-patch: Allow interfile navigation when selecting hunks Abraham Samuel Adekunle
2026-02-06 18:35 ` Junio C Hamano
2026-02-06 20:22 ` Samuel Abraham
2026-02-06 18:54 ` Junio C Hamano
2026-02-06 20:32 ` Samuel Abraham
2026-02-06 19:21 ` Junio C Hamano
2026-02-06 20:37 ` Samuel Abraham
2026-02-12 10:32 ` Samuel Abraham
2026-02-12 17:25 ` Junio C Hamano
2026-02-12 21:13 ` Samuel Abraham
2026-02-12 21:31 ` Junio C Hamano
2026-02-12 22:20 ` Samuel Abraham
2026-02-06 15:57 ` [PATCH v3 3/3] add-patch: Allow proper 'git apply' when using the --rework-with-file flag Abraham Samuel Adekunle
2026-02-06 19:02 ` Junio C Hamano
2026-02-06 20:39 ` Samuel Abraham
2026-02-06 19:19 ` [PATCH v3 0/3] introduce new option `rework-with-file` Junio C Hamano
2026-02-06 20:40 ` Samuel Abraham
2026-02-13 22:08 ` [PATCH v4 0/4] introduce new option `--auto-advance` Abraham Samuel Adekunle
2026-02-13 22:09 ` [PATCH v4 1/4] interactive -p: add new `--auto-advance` flag Abraham Samuel Adekunle
2026-02-13 23:04 ` Junio C Hamano
2026-02-14 9:16 ` Samuel Abraham
2026-02-13 22:10 ` [PATCH v4 2/4] add-patch: modify patch_update_file() signature Abraham Samuel Adekunle
2026-02-13 23:33 ` Junio C Hamano
2026-02-14 10:14 ` Samuel Abraham
2026-02-13 22:11 ` [PATCH v4 3/4] add-patch: allow all-or-none application of patches Abraham Samuel Adekunle
2026-02-13 22:12 ` [PATCH v4 4/4] add-patch: allow interfile navigation when selecting hunks Abraham Samuel Adekunle
2026-02-14 11:01 ` [PATCH v5 0/4] introduce new option `--auto-advance` Abraham Samuel Adekunle
2026-02-14 11:03 ` [PATCH v5 1/4] interactive -p: add new `--auto-advance` flag Abraham Samuel Adekunle
2026-02-14 11:04 ` [PATCH v5 2/4] add-patch: modify patch_update_file() signature Abraham Samuel Adekunle
2026-02-14 11:06 ` [PATCH v5 3/4] add-patch: allow all-or-none application of patches Abraham Samuel Adekunle
2026-02-14 11:06 ` [PATCH v5 4/4] add-patch: allow interfile navigation when selecting hunks Abraham Samuel Adekunle
2026-02-20 22:32 ` [PATCH v5 0/4] introduce new option `--auto-advance` Junio C Hamano
2026-02-21 9:06 ` Samuel Abraham
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=xmqqzf5rys3f.fsf@gitster.g \
--to=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=abrahamadekunle50@gmail.com \
--cc=ben.knoble@gmail.com \
--cc=christian.couder@gmail.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=kristofferhaugsbakk@fastmail.com \
--cc=phillip.wood123@gmail.com \
--cc=ps@pks.im \
--cc=szeder.dev@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox