6 ms·
... unless you actually want to edit a change!
by VMG 5mo ago
... unless you actually want to edit a change!
- throawayonthe 5mo agowell, you can do jj new <revision>, make your edit, and then do jj squash which will add the changes to the prev revision i do this for example when i want to see a specific edit highlighted in my editor, it's a nice workflow i think
- Aeolun 5mo agoThis is exactly how someone explained Git to me 12 years ago or so, and I’ve finally wrapped my head around it. Not changing now.
- hacker161 5mo ago[flagged]
- mh- 5mo agoIf I'm understanding the thread correctly, I have a git alias to `git commit --amend --no-edit`, for exactly this workflow. When I'm hacking on something locally and want to just keep amending a commit. I only ever do this if it's HEAD though.
- steveklabnik 5mo agoYes, one way to think about jj in a sort of low-level way is that every jj command does the equivalent of that, every time. (You can also set up watchman and have that happen on every file change...)
- arccy 5mo agostill use new, and then squash your changes in. that way you can actually see what changes you made
- incognito124 5mo agothen you `new` & `squash` :)
- BeetleB 5mo agoI go back and forth between the two approaches, but because of the whole "accidentally made some temporary changes and now it's a pain to separate/undo them because not all changes were temporary", I also usually do a jj new and then jj squash.