Hi there,
I find the fixup command during an interactive rebase useful.
Sometimes when cleaning up a branch, I end up in a situation like this:
pick 07bc3c9 Good commit.
pick 1313a5e Commit to fixup into c2f62a3.
pick c2f62a3 Another commit.
So, I have to reorder the commits, and change 13
On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 03:05:18PM +0100, Stephen Kelly wrote:
> I find the fixup command during an interactive rebase useful.
>
> Sometimes when cleaning up a branch, I end up in a situation like this:
>
> pick 07bc3c9 Good commit.
> pick 1313a5e Commit to fixup into c2f62a3.
> pick c2f62a3 A
John Keeping wrote:
>> Any thoughts on that?
>
> Are you aware of the "--autosqush" option to git-rebase (and the
> "rebase.autosquash" config setting)? I find that using that combined
> with the "--fixup" option to git-commit makes this workflow a lot more
> intuitive.
Yes, I'm aware of it, but
Stephen Kelly writes:
> Hi there,
>
> I find the fixup command during an interactive rebase useful.
>
> Sometimes when cleaning up a branch, I end up in a situation like this:
>
> pick 07bc3c9 Good commit.
> pick 1313a5e Commit to fixup into c2f62a3.
> pick c2f62a3 Another commit.
>
>
> So, I
Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Sorry, but I do not understand what you are trying to solve.
>
> How can 1313a5e, which fixes misakes made in c2f62a3, come before
> that commit in the first place?
One scenario is something like this:
Start with a clean HEAD (always a good idea :) )
hack hack hack
mak
Stephen Kelly writes:
> Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> Sorry, but I do not understand what you are trying to solve.
>>
>> How can 1313a5e, which fixes misakes made in c2f62a3, come before
>> that commit in the first place?
>
> One scenario is something like this:
>
> Start with a clean HEAD (always a
On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 12:23:41PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> In any case, the intent of the author timestamp is to record the
> time the author _started_ working on the change and came up with an
> initial, possibly a partial, draft. It does not record the time
> when the commit was finalize
Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Stephen Kelly writes:
>> One scenario is something like this:
>>
>> Start with a clean HEAD (always a good idea :) )
>> hack hack hack
>> make multiple commits
>> realize that a hunk you committed in an early patch belongs in a later
>> one. use git rebase -i to fix
On 01/20/2013 03:05 PM, Stephen Kelly wrote:
> I find the fixup command during an interactive rebase useful.
>
> Sometimes when cleaning up a branch, I end up in a situation like this:
>
> pick 07bc3c9 Good commit.
> pick 1313a5e Commit to fixup into c2f62a3.
> pick c2f62a3 Another commit.
>
On 01/21/2013 12:05 PM, Michael Haggerty wrote:
It is perverse to have to turn a well-defined and manifestly
conflict-free wish into one that has a good chance of conflicting, just
because of a limitation of the tool.
Yes, I agree.
I would prefer to be able to mark a commit as 'should be cons
10 matches
Mail list logo
