Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:

quoted text
> On Tue, Mar 17, 2009 at 11:31:19PM +0100, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
>
>> > I was told on IRC that this has been discussed already not so long ago, 
>> > and looking on the archive[1], all i seen was bikesheeding .  Here is a 
>> > patch :-)
>> 
>> Unfortunately, the implementation is not the problem, but picking the best 
>> name.  The first letter "m" will be taken in a short while by the "merge" 
>> command for "rebase -i -p", so "message" is out, sadly.
>> 
>> But the "rephrase" command will be part of the "rebase -i -p" series when 
>> I will finally be able to submit it.
>
> Also, I thought the general plan was to add such features to the
> git-sequencer work which will (hopefully) eventually replace "rebase
> -i". Dscho, can you give a brief update on how that is coming? Are
> rebase patches worth thinking about?

I am not quite sure what rephrase is buying us.  Do we also want to
introduce retree that allows you to muck with the tree object recorded
without giving you a chance to clobber the commit log message?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html