Re: [PATCH 1/2] Tidy up git mergetool's backup file behaviour and variable names
- From
Charles Bailey <charles@hashpling.org>
- Date
- Feb 18, 2008, 08:08 UTC
- Message-ID
- <20080218080841.GA12008@hashpling.org>
- In-Reply-To
- <7vy79jsza1.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org>
On Sun, Feb 17, 2008 at 07:45:42PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Show 18 quoted lines
> Charles Bailey <charles@hashpling.org> writes: > > > Currently a backup pre-merge file with conflict markers is sometimes > > kept with a .orig extenstion and sometimes removed depending on the > > particular merge tool used. > > > > This patch makes the handling consistent across all merge tools and > > configurable via a new mergetool.keepBackup config variable > > > > Changed the merge file path variable to MERGED for consistency with the > > names of the merge temporary filename variables. This done with the > > intention of having these variables used by user scripts in a subsequent > > custom merge tool patch. > > I would have preferred two separate patches, one s/path/MERGED/ > and the other save/remove clean-up, which would be much easier > way to review, but this is what we have, so let's work on this > version.
Fair enough, I'll send an update.
Show 8 quoted lines
> > > +mergetool.keepBackup:: > > + After performing a merge, the original file with conflict markers > > + can be saved as a file with a `.orig` extension. If this variable > > + is set to `false` then this file is not preserved. > > + > > s/$/ Defaults to true (i.e. keep the backup files)/.
Noted.
> We might also want a command line option to override the user's > usual default specified with this configuration but that can be > left for later rounds.
Agreed, I'll tackle this later, given time.
Show 11 quoted lines
> > @@ -112,11 +112,11 @@ resolve_deleted_merge () {
> > }
> >
> > check_unchanged () {
> > - if test "$path" -nt "$BACKUP" ; then
> > + if test "$MERGED" -nt "$BACKUP" ; then
>
> I think this is the cause of your automated test sometimes
> needing 1 sec sleep. This check should perhaps be done with a
> "! cmp $MERGED $BACKUP >/dev/null", which would succeed if the
> user's interaction with the backend tool touched the file.I don't think that we should spend too much time on this seeing as I now fail to reproduce it, but as the code was avoiding the interactive path (i.e. trusting the exit code), it shouldn't have been this check.
Show 6 quoted lines
> > The rest of the patch looked fine to me. > > We might also want to add -y (assume "Yes" answer to "Did you > resolve it" question without actually asking) command line > option to the script, but that would be for later rounds.
Yes, and this would help the automated tests.