Re: [PATCH 2/2] Fix t3404 assumption that `wc -l` does not use whitespace.

From: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Date: Apr 28, 2008, 21:30 UTC
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.1.00.0804282228270.19187@eeepc-johanness>
In-Reply-To: <7vprs9brlh.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org>

Hi,

On Mon, 28 Apr 2008, Junio C Hamano wrote:

Show 29 quoted lines

> Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> writes:
> 
> > On Mon, 28 Apr 2008, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> >
> >> Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> writes:
> >> 
> >> > Maybe an example would help:
> >> >
> >> > -- snip --
> >> > pick abcdefg This is the first commit to be picked
> >> > reset cdefghij
> >> > pick zyxwvux A commit in a side-branch
> >> > merge recursive abcdefg
> >> > -- snap --
> >> 
> >> Indeed it does.  "reset cdefghij" --- does it reset to the exact cdefghij
> >> commit, or cdefghij commit after rewriting?
> >
> > In the example, it would be the original commit.  However, a "reset 
> > abcdefg" _after_ the "pick abcdefg" line would refer to the _rewritten_ 
> > commit.
> >
> > The rationale: you are most likely not wanting to reference _both_ the 
> > original _and_ the rewritten commit.
> 
> That means moving the lines around inside the todo insn list makes the
> same "reset cdefghij" mean different things.
> 
> That's insanity.

I beg you pardon?

Consider this history:

A - B - C - D
      \
        E - F

Now, depending if B was rewritten or not, would you not want the reset before E to mean _different_ things?

I.e. _if_ B is rewritten, E should branch off of the _rewritten_ B, but if B is _not_ rewritten, E should branch off of the original B?

Ciao, Dscho