From: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>
To: Timothy Chen <tnachen@gmail.com>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Allow multiple merges to invalid HEAD
Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2011 17:22:56 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110403222234.GB6537@elie> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1301813216-19507-1-git-send-email-tnachen@gmail.com>
Hi,
Timothy Chen wrote:
> builtin/merge.c | 57 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------------
> 1 files changed, 31 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-)
Now for mechanics.
> --- a/builtin/merge.c
> +++ b/builtin/merge.c
[...]
> @@ -1101,36 +1098,44 @@ int cmd_merge(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix)
> remote_head = peel_to_type(argv[0], 0, NULL, OBJ_COMMIT);
> if (!remote_head)
> die(_("%s - not something we can merge"), argv[0]);
> - read_empty(remote_head->sha1, 0);
> update_ref("initial pull", "HEAD", remote_head->sha1, NULL, 0,
> DIE_ON_ERR);
> - return 0;
> +
> + if (argc < 2)
> + return 0;
When argc == 1, this means read_empty never gets called. Is that
intended?
It breaks 7607.13. Running "make test" is a good way to find some
breakages.
> +
> + hashcpy(head, remote_head->sha1);
> + read_empty(remote_head->sha1, 0);
> + head_arg = argv[0];
> + argc--;
> + argv++;
As always when pretending something, I think a comment would be
helpful. Something to the effect of:
/*
* We were called as "git merge <branch1> <branch2> <branch3>...".
*
* Now HEAD has advanced to <branch1>, and we can pretend
* we were called as "git merge <branch2> <branch3>...".
*/
Though I think I prefer the more explicit comment I suggested last
time[1].
> + }
> +
> + struct strbuf merge_names = STRBUF_INIT;
> +
> - } else {
> - struct strbuf merge_names = STRBUF_INIT;
> -
> - /* We are invoked directly as the first-class UI. */
> + /* We are invoked directly as the first-class UI. */
Won't this break
git merge "message here" $(git rev-parse HEAD) foo bar
? Previously this code was in an "else" block so it wasn't reached in
the is_old_style_invocation case.
> - if (head_invalid || !argc)
> + if (!argc)
> usage_with_options(builtin_merge_usage,
> builtin_merge_options);
What happens with
git merge "message here" HEAD foo bar
from an unborn branch?
Hope that helps.
Jonathan
[1] http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/170456
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-04-03 22:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-04-03 6:46 [PATCH] Allow multiple merges to invalid HEAD Timothy Chen
2011-04-03 7:07 ` Junio C Hamano
2011-04-03 21:52 ` Jonathan Nieder
2011-04-03 8:08 ` Junio C Hamano
2011-04-03 22:22 ` Jonathan Nieder [this message]
2011-04-05 6:01 ` Timothy Chen
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=20110403222234.GB6537@elie \
--to=jrnieder@gmail.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tnachen@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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).