Re: [PATCH] cherry-pick: Append -x line on separate paragraph

> Robin Stocker <robin@nibor.org> writes:
> 
> > Junio C Hamano writes:
> >> Robin Stocker <robin@nibor.org> writes:
> >>
> >> >  		if (opts->record_origin) {
> >> > + /* Some implementations don't terminate message with final \n,
> >> > so
> >> > add it */
> >> > + if (msg.message[strlen(msg.message)-1] != '\n')
> >> > + strbuf_addch(&msgbuf, '\n');
> >>
> >> I can agree that this is a good change.
> >>
> >> > + strbuf_addch(&msgbuf, '\n');
> >>
> >> But this is somewhat dubious. Even if what we are adding is merely
> >> an extra LF, that changes the mechanically generated output format
> >> and can break existing hooks that read from these generated commit
> >> log template.
> >
> > Hm, for a script to break because of an extra LF it would have to be
> > very badly written. If it looks for "\n(cherry picked ...", it would
> > still work. But I see the point.
> 
> If you approach this change from the "information left by -x is
> somehow useful" point of view, it wouldn't make any difference.
> Scripts can match "(cherry picked from ..." and glean useful
> information out of it, with or without an empty line around it.
> 
> But if you look at it from the other perspective [*1*], it makes a
> big difference. A script that wants to excise these lines used to
> be able to just delete such a line. With the proposed change, it
> also has to be aware of an empty line next to it.

> >> Is there a reason better than "having an empty line there look
> >> better to _me_" to justify this change?
> >
> > Yes:
> 
> Then please have them in the proposed commit log message to justify
> the change. I think the following analysis I quoted from your
> message summarizes the motivation well.
> 
> > * If the original commit message consisted just of a summary line,
> >   the commit message after -x would then not have a blank second
> >   line, which is bad style, e.g.:
> >
> > The title of the original commit
> > (cherry picked ...)
> 
> This is very true. So we at least want an empty line added when the
> original is one-liner.
> 
> > * If the original message did not have any trailers, the appended
> >   text would stick to the last paragraph, even though it is a
> >   separate thing.
> 
> The other side of this argument is if there are trailers, we would
> not want an extra blank line. We need to look at the last paragraph
> of the log message and if it does not end with a trailer, we want an
> additional empty line.
> 
> > Maybe the solution is to detect if the original commit message
> > ends with a trailer and in that case keep the existing behavior
> > of not inserting a blank line?
> 
> Yeah, that sounds like a good change from "this makes the result
> look better" point of view.

> > Oh, I like that proposal. I'd lean towards a new --trailer option I
> > think.
> >
> > It would have the same problem of having to append it on a separate
> > paragraph if the original commit message does not already have a
> > trailer though.
> 
> Yes. The logic would be the same. First terminate the incomplete
> last line, if any, and then look at the last paragraph of the commit
> log message (one liner is a natural degenerate case of this; its
> single-line title is the last paragraph) and if and only if it does
> not end with a trailer, add a blank line before adding the marker.
> 
> The only difference between the two would be how the "cherry-picked
> from" line is formatted.

> [Footnote]
> 
> *1* Originally, we added "(cherry picked from ..." by default, and
> had a switch to disable it; later we made it off by default and made
> it optional (and discouraged) with "-x" and this was for a reason.
> Unless the original commit object is also available to the reader of
> the history, the line is a useless noise, and many people are found
> to cherry-pick from their private branches; by definition, the line
> is useless in the resulting commit of such a cherry-pick.