Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] revision: Implement `git log --merge` also for rebase/cherry_pick/revert

From: Johannes Sixt <j6t@kdbg.org>
Date: Jan 24, 2024, 17:19 UTC
Message-ID: <dfb582cf-b1e4-414d-bfe1-0f93d910ec54@kdbg.org>
In-Reply-To: <CABPp-BE4zqRX=wd5EBj96hzCS8V73QpdN-2pCpv7qMdkpkX93w@mail.gmail.com>

Am 24.01.24 um 08:06 schrieb Elijah Newren:

Show 19 quoted lines

> On Wed, Jan 17, 2024 at 12:14 AM Michael Lohmann
>> +static const char *lookup_other_head(struct object_id *oid)
>> +{
>> +       int i;
>> +       static const char *const other_head[] = {
>> +               "MERGE_HEAD", "REBASE_HEAD", "CHERRY_PICK_HEAD", "REVERT_HEAD"
>> +       };
>> +
>> +       for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(other_head); i++)
>> +               if (!read_ref_full(other_head[i],
>> +                               RESOLVE_REF_READING | RESOLVE_REF_NO_RECURSE,
>> +                               oid, NULL)) {
>> +                       if (is_null_oid(oid))
>> +                               die("%s is a symbolic ref???", other_head[i]);
>> +                       return other_head[i];
>> +               }
>> +
>> +       die("--merge without MERGE_HEAD, REBASE_HEAD, CHERRY_PICK_HEAD or REVERT_HEAD?");
>> +}

...

> Also, what about cases where users do a cherry-pick in the middle of a
> rebase, so that both REBASE_HEAD and CHERRY_PICK_HEAD exist?  What
> then?

Good point! IMO, REBASE_HEAD should have lower precedence than all the other *_HEADs. It would mean to reorder the entries:

	static const char *const other_head[] = {
		"MERGE_HEAD", "CHERRY_PICK_HEAD", "REVERT_HEAD", "REBASE_HEAD"
	};

(and perhaps adjust the error message, too).

-- Hannes