git-delta -n
i.e. git-delta -n 2 = 'what changed twice'
or if its just what changed twice in every case then just 'git-delta-delta'
My new Git utility `what-changed-twice` needs a new name
11–20 of 65 posts
Re: My new Git utility `what-changed-twice` needs a new name
#12> There's bonus information too. If a commit is not mentioned in the report, then it only changed files that didn't change in any other commit. That means that in a rebase, I can move that commit literally anywhere else in the sequence without creating a conflict. Only the commits in the report can cause conflicts if they are reordered. This is only true in the textual level. Semantically, re-shuffling commits like t…
This is why I no longer do atomic commits. I've just never had it be a benefit to walk through and guarantee that each commits tests and builds successfully. I so rarely back out changes that when I do, I test then that everything is working (and let's be honest, I back out usually at the PR level, not the commit).
I agree. I decided years ago that that was a lot of work for little or no benefit.
It's enough for the tests to pass at each merge point.
Re: My new Git utility `what-changed-twice` needs a new name
#13Jujutsu has a command which is helpful for this sort of workflow called absorb which pushes all changes from the current commit into the most recent commit which modified that file. (Each file may be merged into a different commit).
Yes, totally useful compared to default git base commands. And also - melding the "changed twice" (or thrice...) mutations into a single commit is a brilliant isolation of a subtle common pattern.
git-absorb does exist [1]. It seems to be inspired by a mercurial subcommand of the same name. It's also available in most distro repos.
Re: My new Git utility `what-changed-twice` needs a new name
#14Jujutsu has a command which is helpful for this sort of workflow called absorb which pushes all changes from the current commit into the most recent commit which modified that file. (Each file may be merged into a different commit).
git-absorb (https://github.com/tummychow/git-absorb) does a bit more, figuring out the exact changes that should be fixed up.
Re: My new Git utility `what-changed-twice` needs a new name
#15Why does it needs a new name?
I had a good idea of what it did before reading the article, it is a long name but not Java-long, and none of the suggestions so far are clear to me, even after reading the article.
The only somewhat confusing part is the "twice", because it can be more than twice. But if you think about it, if it has been changed more than twice, it had to be changed twice at some point, so it is not totally wrong.
Re: My new Git utility `what-changed-twice` needs a new name
#16Jujutsu has a command which is helpful for this sort of workflow called absorb which pushes all changes from the current commit into the most recent commit which modified that file. (Each file may be merged into a different commit).
[deleted]
Re: My new Git utility `what-changed-twice` needs a new name
#17Why does it needs a new name? I had a good idea of what it did before reading the article, it is a long name but not Java-long, and none of the suggestions so far are clear to me, even after reading the article. The only somewhat confusing part is the "twice", because it can be more than twice. But if you think about it, if it has been changed more than twice, it had to be changed twice at some point, so it is not to…
At the time I started writing the article, the utility was called `analyze-commits`. Hard to think of a worse name than that!
By the time I finished writing it I had come up with a less crappy name, but I thought I'd leave the question in the post anyway.
Re: My new Git utility `what-changed-twice` needs a new name
#18"what-changed-twice" tells me exactly what the command does. "squash-what" tells me nothing, why is the program name asking me what to squash, and then why does it not squash? The only inaccuracy I can think of in the name is that it's technically "what-changed-more-than-once." But if something has changed thrice, by definition it's also been changed twice.
Re: My new Git utility `what-changed-twice` needs a new name
#19Double Jeopardy?
Re: My new Git utility `what-changed-twice` needs a new name
#20When I make Bash aliases or functions for Git functionality, I always name them as `git-something-or-other`. That way they're namespaced in a way that I find pleasant both for tab completion and for easy of memory. I think that should apply to more complex utilities, too.
By my usual naming conventions, this one would be `git-repeatedly-changed`.