From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [PATCH] honor GIT_REFLOG_ACTION in git-commit Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2007 18:22:06 -0800 Message-ID: <7vvej2a14h.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> References: <7vfya6bixg.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <20070120021557.GB11073@spearce.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sat Jan 20 03:22:20 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1H85s0-0007mp-T8 for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Sat, 20 Jan 2007 03:22:17 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932869AbXATCWJ (ORCPT ); Fri, 19 Jan 2007 21:22:09 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932807AbXATCWJ (ORCPT ); Fri, 19 Jan 2007 21:22:09 -0500 Received: from fed1rmmtao01.cox.net ([68.230.241.38]:36742 "EHLO fed1rmmtao01.cox.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932869AbXATCWI (ORCPT ); Fri, 19 Jan 2007 21:22:08 -0500 Received: from fed1rmimpo02.cox.net ([70.169.32.72]) by fed1rmmtao01.cox.net (InterMail vM.6.01.06.03 201-2131-130-104-20060516) with ESMTP id <20070120022207.BMVC9173.fed1rmmtao01.cox.net@fed1rmimpo02.cox.net>; Fri, 19 Jan 2007 21:22:07 -0500 Received: from assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net ([68.5.247.80]) by fed1rmimpo02.cox.net with bizsmtp id DENQ1W0181kojtg0000000; Fri, 19 Jan 2007 21:22:25 -0500 To: "Shawn O. Pearce" In-Reply-To: <20070120021557.GB11073@spearce.org> (Shawn O. Pearce's message of "Fri, 19 Jan 2007 21:15:58 -0500") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: "Shawn O. Pearce" writes: > Junio C Hamano wrote: >> This allows git-cherry-pick and git-revert to properly identify >> themselves in the resulting reflog entries. Earlier they were >> recorded as what git-commit has done. > > Not sure how I missed that one when I introduced GIT_REFLOG_ACTION, > but thanks for finding and fixing it. :-) The fact that it went unnoticed for this long time shows how we lack proper tools to read the message part of the reflog, although we use @{N} and @{ago} notation every day and some people might even rely on it. I'd like to do something about it, and my earlier "show-branch --reflog" enhancement series (I'll park that in 'next' for now) was my attempt for that goal. I found this out by accident while working on it.