Justin Tobler <jltobler@xxxxxxxxx> writes: >> + if [ -z ${CI_MERGE_REQUEST_TARGET_BRANCH_SHA} ]; then >> + ./ci/check-whitespace.sh "$CI_MERGE_REQUEST_DIFF_BASE_SHA" >> + else >> + ./ci/check-whitespace.sh "$CI_MERGE_REQUEST_TARGET_BRANCH_SHA" >> + fi > > Not worth a reroll, but it would be nice to have a comment here > explaining why we have this fallback as, to me at least, it is not very > obvious. FWIW, it is not obvious to me, either ;-) Another thing that I find somewhat disturbing is that the conditional seems the other way around. It shouldn't be saying "If B is not available, use A, otherwise use B", as if A is known to be usable always. It should be more like if test -n "$CI_MERGE_REQUEST_DIFF_BASE_SHA" then ci/check-whitespace.sh "$CI_MERGE_REQUEST_DIFF_BASE_SHA" elif test -n "$CI_MERGE_REQUEST_TARGET_BRANCH_SHA" then ci/check-whitespace.sh "$CI_MERGE_REQUEST_TARGET_BRANCH_SHA" else ... noop? barf? ... fi shouldn't it? >> rules: >> - if: $CI_PIPELINE_SOURCE == 'merge_request_event' >> > [snip] > > Overall the GitLab CI changes look good to me. Thanks :) Thanks for a review. Very much appreciated.