Re: [PATCH] pull: warn on --verify-signatures with --rebase

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: May 18, 2016, 16:04 UTC
Message-ID: <xmqq37pftks7.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>
In-Reply-To: <20160518101827.GA14475@netblarch>

Alexander 'z33ky' Hirsch <1zeeky@gmail.com> writes:

> Previously git-pull silently ignored the --verify-signatures option for
> --rebase.

Missing pieces information that would have made the patch more complete are answers to these questions:

 - Is that a bad thing?  Why?

 - Assuming it is a bad thing, what is the solution this patch
   presents us?  Teach rebase about the option?  Error out the
   request?  What is the reason why "warn" was chosen as the best
   way forward?

Show 13 quoted lines

>  builtin/pull.c  |  2 ++
>  t/t5520-pull.sh | 16 ++++++++++++++++
>  2 files changed, 18 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/builtin/pull.c b/builtin/pull.c
> index 1d7333c..0eafae7 100644
> --- a/builtin/pull.c
> +++ b/builtin/pull.c
> @@ -815,6 +815,8 @@ static int run_rebase(const unsigned char *curr_head,
>  		argv_array_push(&args, "--no-autostash");
>  	else if (opt_autostash == 1)
>  		argv_array_push(&args, "--autostash");
> +	if (opt_verify_signatures && strcmp(opt_verify_signatures, "--verify-signatures") == 0)

The logic looks OK. I would have written that long line as two lines, e.g.

	if (opt_verify_signatures &&
            !strcmp(opt_verify_signatures, "--verify-signatures")

though.

> +		warning(_("git-rebase does not support --verify-signatures"));

Is this a good warning message?

As a casual reader, my reaction to this warning would be "Does not support? Then what did it do instead? Did it refuse to integrate my changes on top of what happened on the remote?"

Something like

    warning(_("ignored --verify-signatures as it is meaningless in rebase"));

may convey what is going on better, in that it makes it clear that we are not failing "rebase" and instead we are ignoring "verify".

It is way too long for the final version, though. A more concise way to say the same thing needs to be found.

Thanks.