Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC 01/10] Teach rebase interactive the mark command

From: Junio C Hamano <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2008 23:54:41 -0700

"Shawn O. Pearce" <[email-masked]> writes:

>> Except of this, I prefer to use the colon to be much closer to the syntax
>> of fast-import.
>
> Me too, but it looks like in a human edited "TODO" script we may want
> to be more friendly and allow named marks.  Though I'm not sure that is
> really all that useful.  If you are merging something because it used to
> be merged before the rebase I doubt we'd generate a meaningful mark name
> when the TODO script is initially formatted.

I'd say a small integer is the only thing we would need.  The TODO insn
sequence would be machine generated then manually tweaked, not the other
way around.

Regarding colon vs pound, I would say that the 'mark' insn can just say
"2" to set the second mark, and then store it in refs/marks/2; the
commands that refer to the commit later can use the usual "refs/marks/2"
or "marks/2" syntax without colon nor pound nor any other special syntax
that way.