[rebase PATCH] Introduce --merge-files (-M) flag (WAS: Introduce --no-rebase flag)

Michael Haubenwallner michael.haubenwallner@ssi-schaefer.com
Mon May 6 08:31:00 GMT 2019

On 5/4/19 4:33 PM, Brian Inglis wrote:
> On 2019-05-03 09:32, Michael Haubenwallner wrote:
>> On 4/12/19 8:03 PM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>>> On Apr 12 15:52, Michael Haubenwallner wrote:
>>>> The --no-rebase flag is to update the database for new files, without
>>> Wouldn't something like --merge-files be more descriptive?
>> What about --recognize ?
> "The --recognize flag is to update the database for new files, without
> performing a rebase.  The file names provided should have been rebased
> using the --oblivious flag just before."
> Recognize does not mean record or update in English but see, identify, or
> acknowledge.
> Your earlier suggestion of --record, the verb used in the comment quoted above
> --update, or CV's suggestion --merge-files would make sense and be more
> descriptive.

On a first thought, "merge files" does have a different meaning in the Gentoo
context already, as in "merge files from staging directory into the live file
However, on a second thought, "rebase --merge-files" is performed afterwards,
but still part of that "merge files" phase, so the name does actually fit.

Patch updated.

> I use such brief comments or descriptions as a guide to pick the most obvious
> names for functions, options, etc: if the comment or description then reads as
> if redundant, the choice is good.

Agreed, thanks!  (had --update or even --update-db in mind as well)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 0001-Introduce-merge-files-M-flag.patch
Type: text/x-patch
Size: 6404 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://cygwin.com/pipermail/cygwin-patches/attachments/20190506/f007ef47/attachment.bin>

More information about the Cygwin-patches mailing list