On 25/04/18 13:48, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
Hi Phillip,
On Mon, 23 Apr 2018, Phillip Wood wrote:
On 23/04/18 19:11, Stefan Beller wrote:
On Sat, Apr 21, 2018 at 12:34 AM, Johannes Schindelin
<johannes.schinde...@gmx.de> wrote:
Eric Sunshine pointed out that I had such a commit message in
https://public-inbox.org/git/CAPig+cRrS0_nYJJY=o6cbov630snqhpv5qgrqdd8mw-syzn...@mail.gmail.com/
and I went on a hunt to figure out how the heck this happened.
Turns out that if there is a fixup/squash chain where the *last* command
fails with merge conflicts, and we either --skip ahead or resolve the
conflict to a clean tree and then --continue, our code does not do a
final cleanup.
Contrary to my initial gut feeling, this bug was not introduced by my
rewrite in C of the core parts of rebase -i, but it looks to me as if
that bug was with us for a very long time (at least the --skip part).
The developer (read: user of rebase -i) in me says that we would want to
fast-track this, but the author of rebase -i in me says that we should
be cautious and cook this in `next` for a while.
I looked through the patches again and think this series is good to go.
I've just realized I commented on an outdated version as the new version was
posted there rather than as a reply to v1. I've just looked through it and I'm
not sure it addresses the unnecessary editing of the commit message of the
previous commit if a single squash command is skipped as outlined in
https://public-inbox.org/git/b6512eae-e214-9699-4d69-77117a0da...@talktalk.net/
I have not forgotten about this! I simply did not find the time yet, is
all...
I wondered if that was the case but I wanted to check as I wasn't sure
if you'd seen the original message as it was on an obsolete version of
the series
The patch series still has not been merged to `next`, but I plan on
working on your suggested changes as an add-on commit anyway. I am not
quite sure yet how I want to handle the "avoid running commit for the
first fixup/squash in the series" problem, but I think we will have to add
*yet another* file that is written (in the "we already have comments in
the commit message" conditional block in error_failed_squash())...
I wonder if creating the file in update_squash_messages() rather than
error_failed_squash() would be a better approach as then it is easy to
only create rebase_path_amend_type() when there has already been a
squash or fixup. The file is removed in the loop that picks commits in
pick_commits() so it would be cleaned up at the beginning of the next
pick if it's not needed.
Best Wishes
Phillip
Ciao,
Dscho
