From: Jakub Narebski <jnareb@gmail.com>
To: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, rajesh boyapati <boyapatisrajesh@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 1/3] gitweb: Deal with HEAD pointing to unborn branch in "heads" view
Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2012 23:41:09 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <201202162341.09712.jnareb@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7vr4xuy12f.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
On Thu, 16 Feb 2012, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Jakub Narebski <jnareb@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > Gitweb has problems if HEAD points to an unborn branch, with no
> > commits on it yet, but there are other branches present (so it is not
> > newly initialized repository).
>
> It would be more readable if you rephrase the vague "has problems" with a
> concrete description of what the problem is.
Sorry about this.
The problem is that gitweb would generate the following warning, writing
it in web server logs:
Use of uninitialized value in string eq
> Also, drop the " (so it is ...)" part, which does not add much useful
> information. Your next paragraph describes how a repository can come to
> this state anyway.
O.K.
Anyway the description that repository might be in such a strange state
might be more important that the patch in itself...
> > This can happen if non-bare repository (with default 'master' branch)
> > is updated not via committing but by other means like push to it, or
> > Gerrit. It can happen also just after running "git checkout --orphan
> > <new branch>" but before creating any new commit on this branch.
> >
> > This commit adds test and fixes the issue of being on unborn branch
> > (of HEAD not pointing to a commit) in "heads" view, and also in
> > "summary" view -- which includes "heads" excerpt as subview.
>
> The reader has not seen anything more than "has problems" at this point,
> so "fixes the issue of ..." is not very helpful. You could have just said
> "adds tests and fixes it", if you said that the unspecified "problems"
> apear in "heads" and "summary" view at the beginning of the log message.
O.K.
Should I re-roll this patch with improved commit message?
--
Jakub Narebski
Poland
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-02-16 22:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-02-15 15:36 [PATCHv2 0/3] gitweb: Dealing with being on unborn branch Jakub Narebski
2012-02-15 15:36 ` [PATCHv2 1/3] gitweb: Deal with HEAD pointing to unborn branch in "heads" view Jakub Narebski
2012-02-16 20:29 ` Junio C Hamano
2012-02-16 22:41 ` Jakub Narebski [this message]
2012-02-16 23:28 ` Junio C Hamano
2012-02-17 13:41 ` Jakub Narebski
2012-02-17 14:28 ` Junio C Hamano
2012-02-15 15:36 ` [PATCHv2/RFC 2/3] gitweb: Harden parse_commit and parse_commits Jakub Narebski
2012-02-15 15:36 ` [RFC/PATCHv2 3/3] gitweb: Silence stderr in parse_commit*() subroutines Jakub Narebski
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=201202162341.09712.jnareb@gmail.com \
--to=jnareb@gmail.com \
--cc=boyapatisrajesh@gmail.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.