Re: [PATCH v2] Introduce CHERRY_PICK_HEAD

From: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>
Date: Feb 16, 2011, 23:02 UTC
Message-ID: <20110216230250.GF2615@elie>
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTimBExej1mF=4UuTszcSoKy_xnj7bB3BaT5ze2vH@mail.gmail.com>

Jay Soffian wrote:

> On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 4:42 PM, Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com> wrote:

Show 6 quoted lines

>> Nit: GIT_CHERRY_PICK_HELP is not just for rebase --interactive but
>> for arbitrary porcelain that wants to take care of the commit itself
>> (see v1.5.4-rc0~106^2~1, revert/cherry-pick: Allow overriding the
>> help text by the calling Porcelain, 2007-11-28).
>
> What is the arbitrary porcelain you have in mind? :-)

git sequencer, for example. Or any out-of-tree tool that is using cherry-pick to move around commits and wants to know where they end up.

Show 8 quoted lines

>> The conservative thing to do is indeed to remove CHERRY_PICK_HEAD in
>> this case, I suppose.  But I'd like to have the CHERRY_PICK_HEAD to
>> get the --amend safety when rebasing.  I can send a separate patch
>> for it if you'd like.
>
> Please do, since I'm not really sure what you have in mind. If
> CHERRY_PICK_HEAD is left-behind, it interferes with the eventually
> commit done by rebase --continue.

Wait, does this mean that -c/-C/--amend/CHERRY_PICK_HEAD overrides GIT_AUTHOR_NAME, GIT_AUTHOR_EMAIL, and GIT_AUTHOR_DATE?

*checks*

Yes, it does. The behavior is carried over from v0.99~185 (git-commit-script: get commit message from an existing one, 2005-06-25), but imho it is wrong.

Does this seem worth fixing? Jonathan