Jeff King [off-list ref] writes:
But even without that, I still think format-patch is a reasonable time
to do it. It is the time when I proof-read my commit message and patch
in its final form, and think "do I really want to send this?".
But it is not like "I cannot sign off because I think it is still
iffy".
seems to me like a reasonable time to make such a conscious decision to
signoff (or not).
quoted
But your point still stands; "commit -s" will not see through that
official trick either ;-).
Yes. :)
Actually, no. "commit -s" does not have any need to see through it.
... hack hack hack ...
$ git commit -a -s
... editor opens, you see your Sign-off at the end, with
... the cursor sitting on the first line
... edit the title, move to the line below the Sign-off,
... and do the "---\n\n * comment" thing.
And this survives "rebase -i" (but not "format-patch | am" for
obvious reasons).
So I take it back. The time you do the "git commit" for the very
first time for this change that may need to be rerolled number of
times is the right time to say "-s".
On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 12:11:58PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Jeff King [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
But even without that, I still think format-patch is a reasonable time
to do it. It is the time when I proof-read my commit message and patch
in its final form, and think "do I really want to send this?".
But it is not like "I cannot sign off because I think it is still
iffy".
No, that is not the particular reason in my case, but I think I
explained other reasons why "format-patch -s" is not a wrong workflow.
quoted
quoted
But your point still stands; "commit -s" will not see through that
official trick either ;-).
Yes. :)
Actually, no. "commit -s" does not have any need to see through it.
... hack hack hack ...
$ git commit -a -s
... editor opens, you see your Sign-off at the end, with
... the cursor sitting on the first line
... edit the title, move to the line below the Sign-off,
... and do the "---\n\n * comment" thing.
And this survives "rebase -i" (but not "format-patch | am" for
obvious reasons).
Yes, if your particular workflow is to signoff the very first time you
commit. But it would not work for:
... hack hack hack ...
$ git commit -a
... make a note after "---" ...
... hack hack hack ...
... OK, looks good, ready to signoff ...
$ git commit --amend -s
So it can work, but it is workflow dependent, and in general is a little
flaky with the automagic signoff. You may want to signoff later for a
variety of reasons, not the least of which is that you forgot to type
"-s" the first time.
So I take it back. The time you do the "git commit" for the very
first time for this change that may need to be rerolled number of
times is the right time to say "-s".
If you remember to type it. :)
-Peff