From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2010 06:14:26 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH] rebase--interactive: don't enforce valid branch
Message-ID: <7vd3z6f6wt.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
In-Reply-To: <7vvdcygmz8.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>

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

> Dave Olszewski <cxreg@pobox.com> writes:
>
>>>> +test_expect_success 'rebase while detaching HEAD' '
>>>> +	grandparent=$(git rev-parse HEAD~2) &&
>>>> +	test_tick &&
>>>> +	FAKE_LINES="2 1" git rebase -i HEAD~2 HEAD^0 &&
>>>
>>> What's the point of saying this?  You could instead say:
>>>
>>> 	git rebase -i HEAD~2
>>>
>>> no?
>> ...

Ahh, Ok, the point is that when we start this sequence we are on a branch,
and then you want to end up on a detached HEAD that points at the result
of the branch.

I'll queue it in 'pu', but with a little tweak to the test to make it
clear what is going on, perhaps like this.

    test_expect_success 'rebase while detaching HEAD' '
            git symbolic-ref HEAD &&
            grandparent=$(git rev-parse HEAD~2) &&
            test_tick &&
            FAKE_LINES="2 1" git rebase -i HEAD~2 HEAD^0 &&
            test $grandparent = $(git rev-parse HEAD~2) &&
            test_must_fail git symbolic-ref HEAD
    '

We may need to document this behaviour, by the way, if we make it official
that the extra "branch to be rewritten" parameter can be a non-branch.
Two points are that you can give arbitrary commit, and that you will end
up with a detached HEAD that points at the result if you did so.

Also I did't followed the code, but does it behave sanely when you say
"rebase --abort"?