Just moments ago, I ran into a case where I wanted to change both the
author and committer of a change. I knew about the new `jj metaedit`
command, but until now that only gave me the ability to update the
author of my change, so the committer would remain the same. My only
other option was to reach for `jj desc ... --reset-author`, which has
a deprecation warning:
Warning: `jj describe --reset-author` is deprecated; use `jj metaedit --update-author` instead
In spite of that warning, this had the desired effect: both the author
and committer were updated.
So I figured I'd help `metaedit` grow these flags so it can be a _true_
replacement for `jj desc --reset-author`.
---
The above all happened before I was kindly informed in Discord
(https://discord.com/channels/968932220549103686/1431315533164314674)
that `jj metaedit --update-committer-timestamp` should do what I was
hoping for, which I had initially disregarded and never tried because
the help text originally said:
This updates the committer date to now, without modifying the committer.
However, after trying it out, I noticed it actually _did_ modify the
committer.
So, I set out to improve the situation by renaming the flag (so it's
not partially-wrong: it does update the committer timestamp, as well as
everything else about the committer) and improving the help text in the
various flags.
---
In no particular order, thanks to:
* obtuse, for informing me that the `--update-committer-timestamp`
flag does what I wanted in the first place
* gaetan, for pointing out that my way of thinking was not quite meshing
with how jj does things (every modification will update the committer)
* Martin, for the new flag name
The commit builder prepared by `rewriter.reparent()` already updates the
author to the currently configured one in case the author was previously
unset. When the new author is compared to `commit_builder.author()`,
they compare as equal, making it look like the author didn't change.
If that was the only change that would've happened, the commit is not
rewritten at all, meaning the commit author stays unset. This is fixed
by comparing the new author to the actual author of the old commit.
There were some concerns that `touch` only makes sense if you're
familiar with the Unix `touch` command. I think that's a fair
concern. I did not hear any objections to renaming the command. If
we're going to do it, we should do it now, so it doesn't ever get
released under the old name.
2025-09-03 15:31:43 +00:00
Renamed from cli/tests/test_touch_command.rs (Browse further)
