2 messages, 2 authors, 2016-06-15 · open the first message on its own page
From: Matthieu Moy <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-15 22:46:58
Johannes Schindelin [off-list ref] writes:
I'd really rather stay with "fixup".
I like fixup. I'd say "fixup: <message>" so that the thing actually looks like a program directive rather than natural language. (I disliked this at first, but I may actually like it if it gets into Git!) -- Matthieu
From: Johannes Schindelin <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-15 22:46:58
Hi, On Thu, 18 Jun 2009, Matthieu Moy wrote:
Johannes Schindelin [off-list ref] writes:quoted
I'd really rather stay with "fixup".I like fixup. I'd say "fixup: <message>" so that the thing actually looks like a program directive rather than natural language.
Umm... The thing would be used like this: original edit list: pick b1ab1ab First commit pick deafbee Second commit pick 0123456 This is a fixup for the first commit edited edit list: pick b1ab1ab First commit fixup 0123456 This is a fixup for the first commit pick deafbee Second commit It would squash the first two commits, forget about the second commit message and continue with the last commit. No user interaction unless there are merge conflicts. Ciao, Dscho