Re: git rebase --interactive squash/squish/fold/rollup

From: John Koleszar <john.koleszar@on2.com>
To: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Cc: John Tapsell <johnflux@gmail.com>,
	"git@vger.kernel.org" <git@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: git rebase --interactive squash/squish/fold/rollup
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2009 13:05:51 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1245258351.24610.32.camel@cp-jk-linux.corp.on2.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7vvdmurfao.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>

On Wed, 2009-06-17 at 12:33 -0400, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> So I can see why a variant of "squash" that does not change (nor even ask
> for a replacement of) the commit log message from the one that is being
> amended could be useful.  I am tempted to suggest calling that a "fixup"
> operation, but some people may expect "fixup" to mean a variant of "edit"
> that does not bother you by dropping you back to the shell to touch the
> tree that is recorded (i.e. "fixing up the commit log message only"), so
> it is not a very good word.

I wonder if a better approach might be to add an operator to squash
rather than another verb. "squash!" maybe? This has the nice property
that future verbs that have both interactive and non-interactive modes
could be made consistent with squash easily, rather than having to think
of another synonym.