Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> Shezan Baig <shezbaig.wk@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
>> Just wondering if this patch is going to be available in an upcoming
>> version of git?
>
> As we can see from the exchange you quoted, I do not think we have nailed
> the details of desired behaviour in the updated code down.
>
> Thomas, how would you want to proceed?
Hrm. You wrote:
> The discrepancy in the "abort" case may come only in the three cases:
>
> - EDITOR is pointing at something funny, [let's do the checkout to be
> safe for scripts]
Agreed.
> - The user told us not to do the rebase by making insn sheet empty. In
> other words, this is "aborting the entire rebase", so ideally it
> should come back to the state before the user ran "git rebase"
> command (i.e. where she was before we switched to <branch>).
>
> I do not think this ideal behaviour is something neither batch or
> interactive rebase has traditionally implemented, but I can see how
> we can sell this as a bugfix to the end users.
That's a convincing argument, so let's make it so.
> - It turns out that everything is already contained and there is
> nothing to apply, i.e. after this sequence:
>
> git checkout branch
> git checkout $onto_or_merge_base_between_base_and_branch
>
> we find out that "git cherry $onto_or_merge_base branch" is empty.
Is there a command missing here? This alone does not make them the
same, perhaps you meant some resetting.
I'll assume that you meant a case where the user is *not* on branch, but
base/onto is an ancestor of the branch, e.g., in a sequence
git checkout base
git reset --hard branch~5
# now branch..base is empty
git rebase base branch
the rebase will not do anything unless forced. Similarly for the case
where base==branch. And then
> Because you will be one commit ahead of $onto_or_merge_base if "git
> cherry" were to give one commit to be replayed, I think it is
> logically correct if you stayed at the $onto_or_merge_base without
> checking out <branch>. In other words, abort-with-checkout is not
> ideal for this case; we would want to just abort in this case.
This would be hard to sell, because a script that runs
git rebase base branch
could reasonably assume that after the rebase, the current branch is
'branch', unless some error occurred. And we'd be breaking that.
Or am I missing the point of your reasoning?
--
Thomas Rast
trast@{inf,student}.ethz.ch
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html