> * sa/git-var-empty (2022-11-27) 2 commits > (merged to 'next' on 2022-12-01 at 3b81dcb382) > + var: allow GIT_EDITOR to return null > + var: do not print usage() with a correct invocation > > "git var UNKNOWN_VARIABLE" and "git var VARIABLE" with the variable > given an empty value used to behave identically. Now the latter > just gives an empty output, while the former still gives an error > message. > source: <pull.1434.v3.git.1669472277.gitgitgadget@xxxxxxxxx> After reading gitworkflows.txt and maintaingit.txt, I take it 'next' is a proving ground for the larger community to have a chance to suss out any bugs/regressions. I'm going to assume no further input is needed from me regarding this topic (unless of course I've got a bug!), but let me know if I'm mistaken :-) (and thanks to all the folks who've already provided review!) Is now a good time to resume the conversation of exposing GIT_SEQUENCE_EDITOR variable within git-var [1]? I expect the patch to be mostly the same, but instead following the now-corrected pattern laid out for GIT_EDITOR (and updated to use the new test helper functions). Should I then base my branch on 'next' or upon 'sa/git-var-empty' specifically (now merged to 'next')? [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/git/pull.1424.git.1668972017089.gitgitgadget@xxxxxxxxx/T/#u -- Sean Allred
