On 03/03/2024 23:24, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Kristoffer Haugsbakk <code@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: So, isn't it just the matter of surfacing the information that we are already recording and is already available in a fashion that is easier to use? For example, if "git status --porcelain=[version]" does not give the information, perhaps you can add a line or two to it, instead of duplicating the same information in two places?
That was my thought as well. I also don't think it is helpful to think of a single branch being associated with a rebase these days. If we update the output of "git stasus --porcelain" we should show all the refs that are being rewritten by reading the contents of rebase_path_update_refs() as well as the head-name file.
Best Wishes Phillip
