Re: [PATCH 1/2] rebase: support --signoff with implicit rebase

From: Phillip Wood <phillip.wood@talktalk.net>
Date: Mar 15, 2018, 10:55 UTC
Message-ID: <c9978ac6-ded3-592e-aa49-53172aad75bf@talktalk.net>
In-Reply-To: <nycvar.QRO.7.76.6.1803151112390.20700@ZVAVAG-6OXH6DA.rhebcr.pbec.zvpebfbsg.pbz>

On 15/03/18 10:18, Johannes Schindelin wrote:

Show 32 quoted lines

> Hi Phillip,
> 
> On Wed, 14 Mar 2018, Phillip Wood wrote:
> 
>> diff --git a/git-rebase.sh b/git-rebase.sh
>> index b353c33d41..40301756be 100755
>> --- a/git-rebase.sh
>> +++ b/git-rebase.sh
>> @@ -459,6 +471,18 @@ then
>>  	git_format_patch_opt="$git_format_patch_opt --progress"
>>  fi
>>  
>> +if test -n "$signoff"
>> +then
>> +	test "$interactive_rebase" = explicit &&
>> +		die "$(gettext "error: interactive rebase does not support --signoff")"
>> +	test "$type" = merge &&
>> +		die "$(gettext "error: merge rebase does not support --signoff")"
>> +	test -n "$preserve_merges" &&
>> +		die "$(gettext "error: cannot combine '--signoff' with '--preserve-merges'")"
>> +	git_am_opt="$git_am_opt $signoff"
>> +	force_rebase=t
>> +fi
> 
> I wonder whether we can have this change as a separate commit? Otherwise
> we would lump that change (--interactive --signoff was previously allowed
> but the --signoff was simply ignored) with the other changes...
> 
> As I mentioned in my reply to Junio's comment, it'd be awesome if
> --interactive --signoff was supported (and likewise --merge --signoff),
> but it feels like an undue feature request to be dumped on you, so I'm
> fine with the patch series simply erroring out on those combinations.

I'll have a look, if it's not too much work I'll do that, it would be nice to have --signoff better supported.

Show 5 quoted lines

> (I don't care about --preserve-merges anymore, as everybody knows by now.)
> 
> Ciao,
> Dscho
>