Re: [PATCH 2/6] commit: add amend suboption to --fixup to create amend! commit

Charvi Mendiratta [off-list ref] writes:

Hi Junio,

On Thu, 18 Feb 2021 at 01:20, Junio C Hamano [off-list ref] wrote:
[...]

quoted

The second one, even with s|HEAD|HEAD~3| is even less clear.
Without the "-m", the resulting commit will have the subject that
begins with !amend but the log message body is taken from the given
commit, but with "-m", what happens?  Does a single-liner 'clever
commit message' _replace_ the log message of the named commit,
resulting in an !amend commit that has no message from the original?
Or does 'clever commit message' get _appended_ the log message?

Yes, here it gets _appended_ the log message.  I agree this seems a bit
confusing.

In what situation would a user use "-m 'appended pieces of text'"
option, together with "--fixup=amend:<commit>"?  I am wondering if
we want such a "append to" feature, or is it easier to understand
for end-users if "-m", "-F", "-C" and "-c" (the common trait of
these options is that they contribute to the log message text)
are made incompatible with --fixup=amend:<commit>.

...Thanks, for pointing this out. Also, in the above method for
alnum I think we can initialize an array of alnum[] instead of
alphas[]. Or otherwise I was thinking to instead check:
           if (!isalnum(*c) && *c == ':')

Sure a loop is fine, or alnum[] is fine, or just alpha[] is OK, I
would think.  Do you foresee you'd need --fixup=chomp124:<commit>?
I somehow doubt it.

Hi Junio,

On Fri, 19 Feb 2021 at 00:49, Junio C Hamano [off-list ref] wrote:
[...]

In what situation would a user use "-m 'appended pieces of text'"
option, together with "--fixup=amend:<commit>"?  I am wondering if
we want such a "append to" feature, or is it easier to understand
for end-users if "-m", "-F", "-C" and "-c" (the common trait of
these options is that they contribute to the log message text)
are made incompatible with --fixup=amend:<commit>.

For end-users "-m" or "-F" will make it easier to prepare an "amend!"
commit. Because using the "-m" reduces the cost of opening an editor
to prepare "amend!" commit and it can be done with command line only.
So, I think we can keep -m/-F options.

(Explained more about "-m" use in next thread)

quoted

...Thanks, for pointing this out. Also, in the above method for
alnum I think we can initialize an array of alnum[] instead of
alphas[]. Or otherwise I was thinking to instead check:
           if (!isalnum(*c) && *c == ':')

Sure a loop is fine, or alnum[] is fine, or just alpha[] is OK, I
would think.  Do you foresee you'd need --fixup=chomp124:<commit>?
I somehow doubt it.

For naming the suboptions, I don't see any use of alnum. Earlier, I
thought that it could be possible to add the option of _commit
name/ID_, although I am not sure about any particular use case of it
for future. So I thought of changing it to an alnum[] but I also agree
that we can use just alpha[].