On Thu, Jun 13, 2019 at 06:43:41PM +0100, Phillip Wood wrote:
> >> (2) make the sequencer machinery more careful to clean up after it
> >> is done or it is aborted (for example, "git reset --hard"
> >> could remove these state files preemptively even when a rebase
> >> is not in progress, I would think).
> >>
> >> I think we already had some patches toward the latter recently.
> >
> > Maybe I am not understanding it correctly, but do you mean in (2) that
> > "git reset --hard" would always clear sequencer state?
>
> I think the commit Junio is referring to is
> b07d9bfd17 ("commit/reset: try to clean up sequencer state", 2019-04-16)
> which will only remove the sequencer directory if it stops after the
> pick was the last one in the series. The idea is that if cherry-pick
> stops for a conflict resolution on the last pick user commits the result
> directly or run reset without running `cherry-pick --continue`
> afterwards the sequencer state gets cleaned up properly.
OK, that makes a lot more sense to me. It did make me wonder if doing an
"e"dit on the final commit of a rebase followed by "reset HEAD^" would
clear the sequencer state. But looking at that commit, this kicks in
only for the cherry-pick and revert cases.
Thanks for explaining.
> If we do want to do something then maybe teaching gc not to collect
> commits listed in .git/sequencer/todo and
> .git/rebase-merge/git-rebase-todo would be useful.
IMHO that opens up a can of worms, because the reachability rules get
more complicated (so for example people trying to prune away unwanted
history get confused about what is still mentioning the objects). That's
a reasonable rare case. OTOH, so is mentioning commits in an ongoing
rebase that are not still reachable from the branch you are rebasing,
nor the HEAD reflog.
-Peff
