Re: Fixup of a fixup not working right

From: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Date: Sep 5, 2016, 07:53 UTC
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1609050950130.129229@virtualbox>
In-Reply-To: <8F7471262D1C45D9A7BD1C29277004AD@PhilipOakley>

Hi Philip,

On Sun, 4 Sep 2016, Philip Oakley wrote:

Show 14 quoted lines

> From: "Johannes Schindelin" <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de>
> 
> > The point is that fixup! messages are really special, and are always
> > intended to be squashed into the referenced commit *before* the latter
> > hits `master`.
> 
> I think it's here that we have the hidden use case. I agree that all fixups
> should be squashed before they hit the blessed golden  repository.
> 
> I suspect that some use cases have intermediate repositories that
> contain a 'master' branch (it's just a name ;-) that isn't blessed and
> golden, e.g. at the team review repo level. In such cases it is possible
> for a fixup! to be passed up as part of the review, though it's not the
> current norm/expectation.

In such a case (which can totally arise when criss-crossing Pull Requests on GitHub, for example, where a Pull Request's purpose may be to fix up commits in another Pull Request before the latter is merged), the most appropriate course of action is... to not reorder the fixup!s prematurely.

> > In short, I am opposed to this change.
> 
> It's not like G4W doesn't need fixup!s on the side branches e.g. 5eaffe9
> ("fixup! Handle new t1501 test case properly with MinGW", 2016-07-12)

Yeah, well, Git for Windows' `master` branch is special, in that it is constantly rebased (as "merging rebases", to keep fast-forwardability). I would not necessarily use Git for Windows as a role model in this respect.

Ciao, Dscho