From: Jakub Narebski Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2012 22:41:09 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 1/3] gitweb: Deal with HEAD pointing to unborn branch in "heads" view Message-ID: <201202162341.09712.jnareb@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <7vr4xuy12f.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> On Thu, 16 Feb 2012, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Jakub Narebski 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 > > " 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