Advocacy vs. git

[Steve Borho]

On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 10:19 PM, Theodore Tso <tytso at mit.edu> wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 25, 2009 at 01:59:41AM +0200, Arne Babenhauserheide wrote:
>> Am Freitag 24 April 2009 23:59:02 schrieb Theodore Tso:
>> > They might be more _painful_ to use, sure.  So for me, if we must talk
>> > about "killer features", the one which is why I prefer to use git is
>> > "git commit --amend".  I will very often create a commit, and then
>> > about 30 seconds later, realize that I had typo'ed a comment, or the
>> > feature could be made even better if I made some further changes.  So
>> > at that point, I'll quickly edit the source files, make the further
>> > enhancements, and then use "git commit --amend foo.c".  I do this
>> > ***far*** more often than I use rebase.
>>
>> I kinda do the same - just that I rollback ("hg roll") and use my command
>> history to commit again (hit the up arrowkey twice + enter).
>
> Yeah, but the annoying thing about "hg rollback" is that you lose the
> commit message; you have to save it by hand, or type it all over
> again.
>
> It wouldn't be hard to create a hg extension that extracted the commit
> message before doing the hg rollback, as well as saving files were
> included in the commit, so it could support partial commits
> automatically.  I just never got around to doing it, partially because
> I'm not a python programmer.

Since we're talking about an extension, this is really just a matter
of automating hg qimport -r tip ; hg qrefresh -e ; hg qfinish tip

But then again, any commit tool worth it's salt will remember your
most recent commit messages and allow you to reuse them.

--
Steve Borho