Re: [ANNOUNCE] pg - A patch porcelain for GIT

On 14/02/06, Petr Baudis [off-list ref] wrote:

Dear diary, on Tue, Feb 14, 2006 at 09:58:02PM CET, I got a letter
where Chuck Lever [off-list ref] said that...

quoted

my impression of git is that you don't change stuff that's already
committed.  you revert changes by applying a new commit that backs out
the original changes.  i'm speculating, but i suspect that's why there's
a "stg pick --reverse" and not a "stg uncommit."

It is ok as long as you know what are you doing - if you don't push out
the commits you've just "undid" (or work on a public accessible
repository in the first place, but I think that's kind of rare these
days; quick survey - does anyone reading these lines do that?), there's
nothing wrong on it, and it gives you nice flexibility.

For example, to import bunch of patches (I guess that's the original
intention behind this) you just run git-am on them and then stg uncommit
all of the newly added commits.

This is a sensible way of using an uncommit command but I initially
thought it would be better to make things harder for people wanting to
re-write the history. Anyway, I'll keep this command on my todo list.

--
Catalin