Team, On Mon, 20 Aug 2018, Phillip Wood wrote: > On 17/08/2018 23:44, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > Here are the topics that have been cooking. Commits prefixed with > > '-' are only in 'pu' (proposed updates) while commits prefixed with > > '+' are in 'next'. The ones marked with '.' do not appear in any of > > the integration branches, but I am still holding onto them. > > > * pw/rebase-i-author-script-fix (2018-08-07) 2 commits > > - sequencer: fix quoting in write_author_script > > - sequencer: handle errors from read_author_ident() > > > > Recent "git rebase -i" update started to write bogusly formatted > > author-script, with a matching broken reading code. These are > > being fixed. > > > > Undecided. > > Is it the list consensus to favor this "with extra code, read the > > script written by bad writer" approach? > > I think there was agreement between myself and Eric on the last version, > I'm not sure anyone else has expressed an opinion. The problem with > fixing the quoting without any backwards compatibility is that if git is > upgraded while a rebase is stopped read_author_script() will happily use > the broken quoting to create a corrupted author name in the new commit > if the name contains "'". > > The compatibility code in the latest version relies on the missing "'" > at the end of the GIT_AUTHOR_DATE line which is fixed by > es/rebase-i-author-script-fix which is now in master. If there is a > release with es/rebase-i-author-script-fix but not > pw/rebase-i-author-script-fix we'll have to rethink as the detection > wont be reliable. I have a branch that fixes read_author_script() to use > sq_dequote() at > https://github.com/phillipwood/git/commits/wip/fix-author-script. At the > moment it has compatibility with broken quoting, but I could strip that > out and then sq_dequote() will return an error with the broken quoting > and the user would have to restart the rebase. So one option is to drop > this series and wait for me to finish the improved solution next month. Having thought about it, I am now convinced that it wold be overkill to cater to "upgrade in the middle of a rebase". I think we should drop that part, as it uglifies the code rather a lot, and the impact is not worth the effort IMHO. Ciao, Johannes
