From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.0 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 78ABB1FA01 for ; Thu, 4 Mar 2021 01:11:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1354666AbhCDBDp (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Mar 2021 20:03:45 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com ([64.147.108.71]:63740 "EHLO pb-smtp2.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S237592AbhCDA6t (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Mar 2021 19:58:49 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A9767BF1B3; Wed, 3 Mar 2021 19:58:08 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=AMnzGUgH0K2lhRwfciRDp+AQdMw=; b=Yl8wsD aWoJ/xiR9HdTk4w4lIA/5mRMviXLbE7e/InoYVB4xNDWY9wVL/3+OvigGlNc5l9K wN3NkGHqirkFtZWQb3Wq5XjW+J1dPXEfAYpFNRawb5MuM/2BaB3PS/pkujEaR91R FXeTqyKwVTVF8iT+ZU9TftiQKrs+9sbmwKE34= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=r8vYOzNRXUcXr7dnRDf+oPTc50dRS8y5 UYSWugoBofuNNC9wjGAgj8Z1ZlKSTCq8thM7Jmx+ZEhYOHpNdAUfI4aUZoARckOE 878u4x00yGVNJgQkljOVPq7PQ0IoWz8aTvSC/oY53tQe2dnFq3PhQhuGiUbQAyQV xG41J1k5ADM= Received: from pb-smtp2.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E81DBF1B2; Wed, 3 Mar 2021 19:58:08 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.74.119.39]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1F2ABBF1B1; Wed, 3 Mar 2021 19:58:08 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Eric Sunshine Cc: Charvi Mendiratta , Git List , Christian Couder , Phillip Wood , Christian Couder , Phillip Wood Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/6] commit: add amend suboption to --fixup to create amend! commit References: <20210301084512.27170-1-charvi077@gmail.com> <20210301084512.27170-3-charvi077@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 03 Mar 2021 16:58:07 -0800 In-Reply-To: (Eric Sunshine's message of "Wed, 3 Mar 2021 02:57:41 -0500") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.1.90 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: AF2E514C-7C84-11EB-9AA1-74DE23BA3BAF-77302942!pb-smtp2.pobox.com Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Eric Sunshine writes: > Hmm, I see. I didn't follow whatever discussion led to the decision to > use this sort of prefix matching, but I have to wonder if it is a good > idea. Meaning --fixup=a: and --fixup=amend: do the same thing, until somebody invents --fixup=another: and makes the prefix 'a' no longer unique? I tend to agree that, especially with command line completion support with modern shells, such a prefix matching would not be necessary. > Was the idea that it behave similarly to sequencer commands in > `git rebase --interactive` which are often abbreviated to a single > letter? I personally would feel much more comfortable requiring a > full-word match for `amend` and `reword` at initial implementation. Me too.