Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > On Fri, May 14 2021, Sergey Organov wrote: > >> Đoàn Trần Công Danh <congdanhqx@xxxxxxxxx> writes: >> >>> On 2021-05-13 18:49:03-0600, Alex Henrie <alexhenrie24@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>> On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 7:23 AM Sergey Organov <sorganov@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>> > >>>> > Hello, >>>> > >>>> > Is there a way to specify additional options for "git rebase" when it's >>>> > invoked via: >>>> > >>>> > git pull --rebase >>>> > >>>> > ? What if rebase is used implicitly due to "pull.rebase" being set >>>> > accordingly? >>>> > >>>> > In particular, I'd like to be able to: >>>> > >>>> > git pull --rebase --no-fork-point >>>> > >>>> > but it doesn't work. >>>> >>>> It would be cumbersome, but you could run `git config rebase.forkPoint >>>> false` before pulling and `git config rebase.forkPoint true` after. >>> >>> Or, for this *specific* case: >>> >>> git -c rebase.forkpoint=false pull --rebase >> >> That's nice, thanks! Doesn't solve entire issue, but definitely better >> than nothing. >> >> Probably add generic cmd.<cmd>.opts config support, so that I can say: >> >> git -c cmd.rebase.opts="--no-fork-point --empty=keep" pull --rebase >> >> Thoughts? > > It's been discussed before (but I did not dig up the discussions, > sorry). It's been considered a bad idea, because our commands are a > mixture of plumbing/porcelain commands and switches, so we want to be > able to reliably invoke say ls-tree with some switches internally, > without config tripping us up. > > Of course we could make this sort of thing work by selectively ignoring > the config, but such a thing would be equal in complexity to the effort > of assering that it's safe to introduce new rebase.* config in the > codebase for every switch it has now, but with a less friendly interface > both for git itself and users. I don't see much complexity here. We'd then just need to effectively invoke ls-tree internally like this: git -c 'cmd.ls-tree.opts=' ls-tree Not a big deal. > > I.e. instead of rebase.noForkPoint=<bool> we'd need to to getopt parsing > on some cmd.rebase.opts string. As this is meant to be generic, then yes, every command will first parse corresponding config option, then command-line options, rebase not being any different. > > I don't see why in this case what I suggested elsewhere in the thread > wouldn't be viable, i.e. you specify --rebase or --merge to "pull", and > that affects how we interpret the rest of the options. I haven't tried > it though, so there may be hidden gotchas there I haven't thought of. This is the best solution for "git pull" indeed, but the above is a generic feature that could provide solution in cases like this, where immediate specific solution is not (yet) available. Thanks, -- Sergey Organov
