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 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).