Re: [PATCH] Teach merge the '[-e|--edit]' option

From: Jay Soffian <jaysoffian@gmail.com>
Date: Oct 7, 2011, 19:07 UTC
Message-ID: <CAG+J_DxrQCS8zn5KJ8HnpqShVbMw=zCbqDVa=w08EEibw=tsAA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAG+J_Dz7-tTdgT=cqoKhK+fAhmESLnp93yHyxOF_NOY5Wx01+w@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Oct 7, 2011 at 2:01 PM, Jay Soffian <jaysoffian@gmail.com> wrote:

> I actually think a better choice would be to remove commit_tree() from
> merge and always have it run commit externally. I'm not seriously
> suggesting that be done, but it would make git more consistent. But
> I'm not going to send in a patch which makes the situation worse.

The other inconsistencies I'm aware of between "merge --no-commit && commit" vs "merge" on a clean merge are:

* reflog
  - merge uses either "Merge made by the '...' strategy." OR "In-index merge"
  - commit uses "commit (merge) <subject>"

* hooks
  - merge calls
    1) "prepare-commit-msg MERGE_MSG merge"
    2) "post-merge [0|1]" where [0|1] indicates a squash or not.
  - commit calls
    1) "pre-commit"
    2) "prepare-commit-msg COMMIT_EDITMSG merge"
    3) "commit-msg COMMIT_EDITMSG"
    4) "post-commit"

* gc
  - merge calls "git gc --auto" after a successful merge unless
--squash was used
  - commit does not call "git gc --auto"

* diffstat: merge shows it, commit does not

j.