Re: When exactly should REBASE_HEAD exist?

From: Stefan Haller <lists@haller-berlin.de>
Date: Mar 4, 2023, 08:36 UTC
Message-ID: <347052f1-dd7d-dc72-6171-a858eea94747@haller-berlin.de>
In-Reply-To: <CAPx1Gvdik+QhTw8U1vd0cW1yZ9GbgDpmW7apxnXdY=E0okLpTQ@mail.gmail.com>

On 03.03.23 22:25, Chris Torek wrote:

Show 7 quoted lines

> On Fri, Mar 3, 2023 at 3:04 AM Stefan Haller <lists@haller-berlin.de> wrote:
>> It seems that I can get close by checking whether the file
>> .git/rebase-merge/amend exists.
> 
> The location and existence of this file depends on Git version and
> whether you're using added working trees, so that's not generally
> the right directionA to go.

From what I can see, the current behavior of the .git/rebase-merge/amend file was done in 2.12, that would be more than good enough for me. Did I miss any changes to the behavior since then?

I'm surprised to hear that worktrees play a role in this. Do you have more details about this?

> It would be best if `git status`
> reported all of this information directly: perhaps --porcelain=v2
> can be augmented to provide this, or there might even be a
> --porcelain=v3 if necessary.

Yes, that would be nice, but based on what state would it provide this information? Are you suggesting that some new file should be added to .git/rebase-merge/ to keep track of it (more reliably than the amend file does today), or could the information be derived somehow from what exists already? And if it's the latter, then why shouldn't I be able to do that myself in the same way for the time being?

-Stefan