On Fri, Jul 16, 2021 at 01:34:58PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes: > > > I think we still end up calling cleanup_message() on the result before > > using it as the final message, and that will fix any missing newline. > > But we feed the intermediate state before then to the hooks (which is > > exactly where one might expect to use interpret-trailers). > > > > I'm not sure if we should be doing a preemptive call to > > cleanup_message() before feeding the hooks (we'd still need to do the > > final one, to clean up whatever the hooks return to us). I guess > > probably not, because I think that would remove comments, as well. So > > adding in just the missing newline is probably better. > > To be quite honest, I think this patch is a half-way solution and I > am not sure if it is better than either of the two "purist" > extremes: > > * If the hooks want to see messages with as little loss of > information from the original as possible, we should give them > without clean-up (which you pointed out above) *and* without this > patch. > > * If the hooks want to see messages as canonicalized as people > would see in normal "git log" output, we should be passing the > full clean-up to lose even comments and in such a case there is > no need for this "always terminate" patch (we'd instead do far > more). > > Between the two approaches, both are purists' view, I'd prefer the > former, but from that stance, the conclusion would become that there > is no need to do anything, which may be a bit unsatisfactory. Yes, I agree with all of that (including the "as little loss of information as possible" preference). > > Since it will usually be added back in by cleanup_message() anyway, I > > think it's OK to just add it preemptively. The exception would be if the > > user asked for no cleanup at all. So making it conditional on > > cleanup_mode would work, whether -F or not. > > > > I suppose that does mean people turning off cleanup mode would get a > > message without a newline from fmt_merge_msg(), though, which is perhaps > > unexpected. > > > > So maybe just keeping the newline there, as you suggest, is the best > > way. > > Hmph. > > If the user tells us "refrain from touching my message as much as > possible" and feeds us a proposed log message that ends with an > incomplete line, I would think they expect us not to turn it into a > complete line, and I would think doing this change only when cleanup > is in effect would make sense. This is especially true for users > who do not let any hooks to interfere. They used to get their > incomplete lines intact, now their incomplete lines will > unconditionally get completed. I am not sure if I would want to > defend this change from their complaints. Right, what I was suggesting was: if (cleanup_mode != COMMIT_MSG_CLEANUP_NONE) strbuf_complete(&msg); which would cover that case. But Phillip mentioned that our own fmt_merge_msg() does not include a newline. So it would not be the user feeding us an incomplete line, but rather Git feeding it. And that was what I suggested should be corrected (which I suppose would be in addition to correcting lines from the user). However, I see a call to strbuf_complete_line() at the end of fmt_merge_msg(), so I am puzzled about what he meant. -Peff
