On Tue, Jan 1, 2013 at 5:31 PM, <gree...@obbligato.org> wrote: > Junio C Hamano <gits...@pobox.com> writes: > >> "David A. Greene" <gree...@obbligato.org> writes: >> >>> From: James Nylen <jny...@gmail.com> >>> >>> Teach git-subtree about --unannotate. This option strips a prefix >>> from a commit message when doing a subtree split. >> >> Hrm. This looks like a workaround for a short-sighted misdesign of >> the annotate option that only allowed prefixing a fixed string. I >> have to wonder if it is better to deprecate --annotate and replace >> it with a more general "commit log rewriting" facility that can >> cover both use cases? > > That's not a bad idea. I'd have to think a bit about a sensible design. > Do you have any ideas, James?
I just now saw these emails. I'm having a hard time thinking of any good use case other than: - add "fancylib" as a subtree of "myprog" - commit to myprog repo: "fancylib: don't crash as much" - split these commits back out to fancylib's main repo, and remove the "fancylib: " prefix You could potentially have something like "Don't crash as much (fancylib)" but that's awkward. What might you want to do with a pattern-based rewrite that doesn't involve removing a prefix when splitting commits? In fact, I don't see the use of the original --annotate option at all, since it causes more detailed commit messages in the smaller of the two repositories. -- 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
