Re: suggestion for git rebase -i

Johannes Schindelin [off-list ref] writes:

Why?  This is an implementation detail, and should not concern the
user.

In the context of an existing editing session, the name of the
tempfile is visible and relevant to the user (not just an
implementation detail).  For example, the tempfile name is useful when
multi-tasking and one needs to get back to the buffer.  As another
reply pointed out, the name could also be used for editor mode
customization.

So.  When editing a commit message, the buffer is named
COMMIT_EDITMSG.  When editing a rebase -i buffer it is named todo.  Is
this a real problem?  Of course not.  But I think a slightly more
descriptive name makes sense -- especially if other commands gain
interactive modes and a user might have a number of them going at once
(in different repos, e.g.).

+ seth

Hi,

On Sat, 28 Jul 2007, Seth Falcon wrote:

Johannes Schindelin [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

Why?  This is an implementation detail, and should not concern the
user.

In the context of an existing editing session, the name of the tempfile 
is visible and relevant to the user (not just an implementation detail).  
For example, the tempfile name is useful when multi-tasking and one 
needs to get back to the buffer.  As another reply pointed out, the name 
could also be used for editor mode customization.

Okay, fair enough.  But since you want that feature, you get to do the 
patch.  Hint: it is just one line that has to be changed.

Ciao,
Dscho