Re: [Qgit RFC] commit --amend

On Mon, Jun 11, 2007 at 00:10:20 +0200, Marco Costalba wrote:

On 6/10/07, Jan Hudec [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

Hello,

I am thinking about adding commit --amend support to Qgit.

Good!

quoted

- Add a separate action to the menu. This action would take over the 
refresh
  (Add to top) operation when using stgit.

  I believe this has lower risk of user errors than the previous option. 
  It
  also has the advantage, that I don't have to touch the disabling logic 
  for
  the commit action. Amending last commit is always possible, even if 
  there
  are no changes, because you might want to edit the message (eg. if you
  forget to sign-off or forget to mention some change or something).

Yes. But amending is an option of commit (also in git) so probably the
amend action will fire the commit dialog anyway and we are back to
previous situation. The only advantage is that we can load the message
of the tip revision as default instead of git-status output as the
current.

quoted

I'll try doing the first option now, unless somebody persuades me that it's
a nonsense.

I think it's the best: 'Sync' button is very seldom used (I think I've
never used it but for testing that it works) and updating the index is
something very plumbing anyway.

What we could add is another button 'Load prev msg' to do what it
says, so we would end up with 5 buttons:

- Settings /Cancel/ Load prev msg / Amend /Commit

I don't see a reason to set 'Load prev msg' as a check button, you may
want to reload the prev msg as many times as you need, (re)clicking
everytime on the button, also for a normal commit where as example you
want to keep the header or part of the subject of the previous
revision.

I think it would be somewhat complicated unfortunately :-(. The loading of
previous message should be really tied to whether you are about to
amend/refresh or to commit/add new. In this respect this would actually match
the command-line interface, because you say whether you want to amend
*before* you edit the message.

So I am now inclined more to the separate action and trying to go that way.
But the difference between the variants would not be that big.

Please let me know if and where you find something obscure/messy with
the code, I will be happy to help you.

I think I mostly understood it now. Thank you.

-- 
						 Jan 'Bulb' Hudec [off-list ref]