Hi Peff, On Wed, 3 Aug 2016, Jeff King wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 03, 2016 at 09:08:48AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > > > However, I could imagine that we actually want this to be more > > > extensible. After all, all you are doing is to introduce a new > > > rebase -i command that does nothing else than shelling out to a > > > command. > > > > Yup, I tend to agree. > > > > Adding "sign" feature (i.e. make it pass -S to "commit [--amend]") may > > be a good thing, but adding "sign" command to do so is not a great > > design. > > I'm not sure what you mean by "feature" here, but it reminded me of > Michael's proposal to allow options to todo lines: > > http://public-inbox.org/git/530da00e.4090...@alum.mit.edu/ > > which would allow: > > pick -S 1234abcd > > If that's what you meant, I think it is a good idea. :) I looked at the code in git-rebase--interactive.sh again and stumbled over something important: if you "pick" a commit, it *already* uses the information provided to the rebase command via the -S option, *unless* the pick fast-forwards. That is, I came to believe that the "sign" command is unnecessary, and that the --force-rebase option in conjunction with the -S option is what should be used. Ciao, Dscho -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
