From: "Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason" <avarab@gmail.com>
To: Alex Henrie <alexhenrie24@gmail.com>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, gitster@pobox.com, newren@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] rebase: respect --ff-only option
Date: Mon, 05 Jul 2021 11:27:16 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87a6n16r1l.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210705044505.666977-1-alexhenrie24@gmail.com>
On Sun, Jul 04 2021, Alex Henrie wrote:
> I'm sending this patch as an RFC because I'm sure someone will find at
> least one thing that needs to be changed before it's committed.
FWIW that's true of most non-RFC patches :)
> +int error_ff_impossible(void)
> +{
> + error(_("Not possible to fast-forward, aborting."));
> + return -1;
> +}
Here's one, the idiom is just "return error", i.e it itself returns -1.
FWIW I'd consider doing:
/* earlier, static scope */
static const char error_ff_impossible = N_("Not possible...");
/* later, function scope */
return error(error_ff_impossible);
It's a small difference, but for translators who use the jump-to-source
while translating not having the indirection helps, and in this case
it's just used 3 times...
> [...]
> if (parent && parse_commit(parent) < 0)
> /* TRANSLATORS: The first %s will be a "todo" command like
> @@ -2764,7 +2769,7 @@ static int populate_opts_cb(const char *key, const char *value, void *data)
> else if (!strcmp(key, "options.record-origin"))
> opts->record_origin = git_config_bool_or_int(key, value, &error_flag);
> else if (!strcmp(key, "options.allow-ff"))
> - opts->allow_ff = git_config_bool_or_int(key, value, &error_flag);
> + opts->fast_forward = git_config_bool_or_int(key, value, &error_flag) ? FF_ALLOW : FF_NO;
Since we're on nits, we try to wrap at 80 characters.
> +test_expect_success "rebase: impossible fast-forward rebase" '
> + test_config rebase.autostash true &&
> + git reset --hard &&
> + echo dirty >>file1 &&
> + (git rebase --ff-only unrelated-onto-branch || true) &&
Never "||" git commands, better as test_might_fail. We don't want to
hide segfaults.
I saw Phillip Wood had some comments on the rest, I didn't test this,
just skimmed it, but generally LGTM from a glance, not getting down to
the nuts of more deeply inspecting the logic.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-07-05 9:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-07-05 4:45 [PATCH RFC] rebase: respect --ff-only option Alex Henrie
2021-07-05 8:53 ` Phillip Wood
2021-07-05 9:58 ` Junio C Hamano
2021-07-05 12:09 ` Felipe Contreras
2021-07-05 13:54 ` Phillip Wood
2021-07-07 0:30 ` Felipe Contreras
2021-07-05 15:29 ` Phillip Wood
2021-07-05 16:50 ` Junio C Hamano
2021-07-05 19:23 ` Junio C Hamano
2021-07-05 19:48 ` Alex Henrie
2021-07-06 13:52 ` Phillip Wood
2021-07-06 14:43 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2021-07-07 1:13 ` Felipe Contreras
2021-07-05 9:27 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason [this message]
2021-07-05 12:00 ` Felipe Contreras
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=87a6n16r1l.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com \
--to=avarab@gmail.com \
--cc=alexhenrie24@gmail.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=newren@gmail.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.