Chris Johnsen <chris_johnsen@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > When a cherry-pick of an empty commit is done, release the lock > held on the index. > > The fix is the same as was applied to similar code in 4271666046. > > Signed-off-by: Chris Johnsen <chris_johnsen@xxxxxxxxx> Thanks. Will apply. We should handle possible refactoring as a separate topic. > UNEVEN TREATMENT OF EMPTY CHANGES > > It seems that empty commits suffer uneven treatment under various > patch-transport/history-rewriting mechanisms. They seem to be > handled okay in the most of the core (fetch, push, bundle all > seem to preserve empty commits, though I have not done rigorous > testing). They just transfer an existing history from one place to another without modifying, so it is unfortunately true that they preserve such a broken history with empty commits. > 'format-patch', 'send-email', 'apply', 'am', 'rebase' (automatic, > non-fast-forward; and --interactive). These are all about creating history afresh, and they actively discourage empty commits to be (re)created. There is no "uneven treatment". > 36863af16e (git-commit --allow-empty) says "This is primarily for > use by foreign scm interface scripts.". Is this the only case > where empty commits _should_ be used? If foreign scm recorded an empty commit, it would be nice to be able to recreate such a broken history _if the user wanted to_, and that is where the --allow-empty option can be used. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
