From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#75355: [PATCH 1/1] Improve comment cycling in log-edit Date: Sun, 05 Jan 2025 09:28:29 +0200 Message-ID: <86a5c5afdu.fsf@gnu.org> References: <20250104162859.13378-1-jonas@bernoul.li> <20250104171108.18590-1-jonas@bernoul.li> <86pll2bezh.fsf@gnu.org> <8734hy1acx.fsf@bernoul.li> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="11243"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: 75355@debbugs.gnu.org To: Jonas Bernoulli Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sun Jan 05 08:29:27 2025 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1tUL4g-0002on-OM for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 05 Jan 2025 08:29:26 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1tUL4P-0005w7-0C; Sun, 05 Jan 2025 02:29:09 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1tUL4L-0005vl-QS for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 05 Jan 2025 02:29:07 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:5::43]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1tUL4I-0004Fr-Ak for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 05 Jan 2025 02:29:05 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=debbugs.gnu.org; s=debbugs-gnu-org; h=References:In-Reply-To:From:Date:To:Subject; bh=0mPwm9XyG5zozpBGzCumdCyFN0Ue3biOGu2p1UX7R/k=; b=r9q+tu4pSRBtLp7oL7jw7U2ht7XQ88eZB9VUOJLey5I6guhEdj274SG+A9TYDuUXocZhm2O6A+PFA+xiXwHwVFsTZKpzD7QL0Hk9hDkSF2elVpv77TdoO4wm1e8ivrrmm+rKZYzC/QqJDSnXWhV3WzO/xc2k3S+pfW8H4q5IScsozBcvvv8LJLG/QFQL4TI/GC3SK9l4oDDE/YRdXHdMLaqZINhCd/2ZuIGOrXlw8PsyhmCPVhJUtkc/hi/bPloacll5FcvXyH0zgBftA8vMysRazPtKu7oFGeRnSc/xeTnt1tt+aPrweGfPzZ2dv+2dTFY7VWWNv9Ta1sop2c/m7w==; Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1tUL4H-00013g-Mu for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 05 Jan 2025 02:29:01 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sun, 05 Jan 2025 07:29:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 75355 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: patch Original-Received: via spool by 75355-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B75355.17360621214037 (code B ref 75355); Sun, 05 Jan 2025 07:29:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 75355) by debbugs.gnu.org; 5 Jan 2025 07:28:41 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:59581 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1tUL3x-000133-3y for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 05 Jan 2025 02:28:41 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:57160) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1tUL3u-00012l-R8 for 75355@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 05 Jan 2025 02:28:39 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1tUL3o-0004Ax-5y; Sun, 05 Jan 2025 02:28:32 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=References:Subject:In-Reply-To:To:From:Date: mime-version; bh=0mPwm9XyG5zozpBGzCumdCyFN0Ue3biOGu2p1UX7R/k=; b=R4Je5gxRnVfZ h5j7F+w3hRfBAndY9BcVYvCOKgv5Vj1bw1YtH/fdGLTHFUuVdiYsVjUGFxag2GtmBVHL2YbBvTVch /4i9n1EZFeJF000+vgvmXbEu/OGnnBCduQ1XfO35aBMu1f1NT6t87lwYQHzHTLqP0nzRoLJxEHl0I Beryr1V33p7/w/+8yXWcHZw5xNLOm1bSy9aU8ZrQfxY28tgLSDphNFhN3GZsGd1+KCuAnOTSaQWQb kPs+WqIUTBqUa6SqvLuI1qTvTm5hreqOeRbqOuCn+gtikTpF0TPdN3ALqiaXM4H1yYL9H7VC2ao5P 1j1hJOqYjR2zCyUMkzInkw==; In-Reply-To: <8734hy1acx.fsf@bernoul.li> (message from Jonas Bernoulli on Sat, 04 Jan 2025 23:29:34 +0100) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.bugs:298504 Archived-At: > From: Jonas Bernoulli > Cc: 75355@debbugs.gnu.org > Date: Sat, 04 Jan 2025 23:29:34 +0100 > > Eli Zaretskii writes: > > >> Date: Sat, 4 Jan 2025 18:11:08 +0100 > >> From: Jonas Bernoulli via "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, > >> the Swiss army knife of text editors" > >> > >> Save the current message before cycling to older messages, making it > >> possible to cycle back to that initial message. > > > > Thanks, but can you provide some rationale for this? Is the > > assumption that users need to make several commits that all share the > > same comment or something? > > That is one use-case for the feature as it exists now, yes. Messages > are already automatically saved once the user either finished or aborts > the commit. > > These changes don't really affect that. I consider this additional > automatic saving a bugfix. Without it, a user may start typing a new > message, decide to use a recent message instead, navigate to it but then > change their mind about that, and then they would not be able to go back > to the new message they had already started typing, because it was > discarded when they moved a way from it. By saving the new message when > we move away from it, we make it possible to navigate back to it. What do you mean by "move away" and "navigate", in the context of log-edit? > By additionally defining log-edit-save-comment as a command we gain the > ability to save the message at random point. This could, for example, > be useful if we have to use very similar messages in different commits, > potentially across multiple repositories. Is this a frequent use case? Why would the same log message be used for different commits?