Re: [PATCH 1/2] t3507: pin CHERRY_PICK_HEAD absence for a conflicting --no-commit

From: Aleksei Sviridkin <f@lex.la>
Date: Sep 3, 2026, 21:45 UTC
Message-ID: <20260903214553.53942-1-f@lex.la>
In-Reply-To: <xmqq7bl29g2p.fsf@gitster.g>

Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes:

Show 5 quoted lines

> It is not apparent what problem, if any, the description
> above claims the commit addresses.  Nor is it clear why
> checking these combinations is relevant.
> [...]
> Can you help me understand the above two paragraphs a bit better?

The test pins the one combination t3507 did not cover. The file already checks CHERRY_PICK_HEAD after a conflicting pick, after a clean pick, and after a clean pick under --no-commit, but not after a conflicting pick under --no-commit. That is the case a user hits by accident: the pick stops on conflicts, they resolve and run "git commit", and the original author is not restored. --no-commit never wrote the ref, d7e5c0cbfb skips it on purpose. Your reading is right and Gemini's is backwards: under --no-commit we do not want CHERRY_PICK_HEAD, and the test asserts it is absent. Without it, teaching git to write the ref there would leave the whole file green.

The message was unclear, sorry. "it" was that missing case and "siblings" the three existing checks. v2 with a reworded message goes out once 24 hours have passed since v1.