From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: John Koleszar Subject: Re: git rebase --interactive squash/squish/fold/rollup Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2009 13:05:51 -0400 Organization: On2 Technologies Message-ID: <1245258351.24610.32.camel@cp-jk-linux.corp.on2.com> References: <43d8ce650906170555m644564b3v3722168f7217c326@mail.gmail.com> <7vvdmurfao.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Reply-To: john.koleszar@on2.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: John Tapsell , "git@vger.kernel.org" To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Jun 17 19:06:51 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1MGyb4-0002TE-AJ for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Wed, 17 Jun 2009 19:06:50 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754941AbZFQRGj (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Jun 2009 13:06:39 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754560AbZFQRGj (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Jun 2009 13:06:39 -0400 Received: from mail.on2.com ([66.162.65.131]:57206 "EHLO on2.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753651AbZFQRGi (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Jun 2009 13:06:38 -0400 In-Reply-To: <7vvdmurfao.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> X-Mailer: Evolution 2.24.5 X-On2-MailScanner-i: Found to be clean X-On2-MailScanner-From: john.koleszar@on2.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: 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.