From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: David Kastrup Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Rewriting bzrmerge.el Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2014 19:20:16 +0100 Message-ID: <87wq6wl40v.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> References: <20141027000718.F09B5382A66@snark.thyrsus.com> <87bno8y0rt.fsf_-_@engster.org> <838ujcfn1i.fsf@gnu.org> <87ppcowhhd.fsf@engster.org> <8761egmjzh.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <83tx20e3sx.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1416075661 347 80.91.229.3 (15 Nov 2014 18:21:01 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2014 18:21:01 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Nov 15 19:20:54 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Xphxt-00071O-1C for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 15 Nov 2014 19:20:53 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:41520 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Xphxs-0004q3-Ij for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 15 Nov 2014 13:20:52 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:33672) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XphxR-0004p6-Ik for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 15 Nov 2014 13:20:50 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XphxJ-0004tj-CR for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 15 Nov 2014 13:20:25 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:53251) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XphxJ-0004tf-7K for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 15 Nov 2014 13:20:17 -0500 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:60426 helo=lola) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XphxI-00066l-Iu; Sat, 15 Nov 2014 13:20:16 -0500 Original-Received: by lola (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 2C594E0B2B; Sat, 15 Nov 2014 19:20:16 +0100 (CET) In-Reply-To: <83tx20e3sx.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Sat, 15 Nov 2014 20:06:54 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Error: Malformed IPv6 address (bad octet value). X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:177222 Archived-At: Eli Zaretskii writes: >> From: David Kastrup >> Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2014 18:50:10 +0100 >> >> git rebase -i > > Wouldn't that unnecessarily annoy, since most of the commits should be > merged, and only a minority (sometimes non-existing minority) should > not? It wouldn't. You can mark all commits (apart from the first) as s (squash), and then you get to edit one commit message which is composed of all the individual commit messages. Where is the annoyance in that? But actually, I tend to group a feature branch into several logically coherent commits. That's also easy to do with git rebase -i. -- David Kastrup