Re: [PATCH v3 0/7] rebase -i: impove handling of failed commands

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 07/08/2023 21:16, Glen Choo wrote:
Hi Phillip!

"Phillip Wood via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@xxxxxxxxx> writes:

This series fixes several bugs in the way we handle a commit cannot be
picked because it would overwrite an untracked file.

  * after a failed pick "git rebase --continue" will happily commit any
    staged changes even though no commit was picked.

  * the commit of the failed pick is recorded as rewritten even though no
    commit was picked.

  * the "done" file used by "git status" to show the recently executed
    commands contains an incorrect entry.

Thanks to Eric, Glen and Junio for their comments on v2. Here are the
changes since v2:

Thanks for sending this version, and apologies for not getting to it
sooner (I tried a few times, but it was hard to reconstruct the context
around something as complicated as sequencer.c..). Unfortunately, I
don't think I will be able to chime in on subsequent rounds.

Thanks again for you comments on the last round, they were really helpful in improving the commit messages.

Patch 1 - Reworded the commit message.

Patch 2 - Reworded the commit message, added a test and fixed error message
pointed out by Glen.

Patch 3 - New cleanup.

Patch 4 - Reworded the commit message, now only increments
todo_list->current if there is no error.

Patch 5 - Swapped with next patch. Reworded the commit message, stopped
testing implementation (suggested by Glen). Expanded post-rewrite hook test.

Patch 6 - Reworded the commit message, now uses the message file rather than
the author script to check if "rebase --continue" should commit staged
changes. Junio suggested using a separate file for this but I think that
would end up being more involved as we'd need to be careful about creating
and removing it.

Patch 7 - Reworded the commit message.

I found the updated commit messages much easier to understand, and the
change to no longer test implementation is also very welcome, so
overall, I think this is a marked improvement over the previous version.

Thanks, I'm glad the messages are easier to understand now

Like Junio, I'm not familiar enough with sequencer or its 'expected
behavior' to feel comfortable LGTM-ing the later patches.

Yes, I'm hoping Dscho will have time to take a look at them once 2.42.0 is out.

Best Wishes

Phillip



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]

  Powered by Linux