From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2025 23:49:17 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] replay: drop commits that become empty
Message-ID: <xmqqtsxozn2a.fsf@gitster.g>
In-Reply-To: <d54c50ef-9d6c-498c-aca3-ed4461733190@gmail.com>

Phillip Wood <phillip.wood123@gmail.com> writes:

>> 	git commit --allow-empty --only -m empty
>> 
>> because without --only, the changes to blah will be taken.
>
> I've got into the habit of always adding "--only" when I want to create 
> an empty commit in case there are staged changes. I don't really like 
> "--allow-empty" as I've never wanted to create commit that might or 
> might not be empty - either I want to create an empty commit in which 
> case I don't want to commit any staged changes, or I want the commit to 
> fail if there are no staged changes). I can remove it if you want.

Being explicit when you are unsure is good, but in this script I
think we should be very sure that the index matches HEAD, so I would
consider that the only effect of the use of the "--only" here is to
puzzle readers.

A comment "# force an empty commit by including no paths" before the
command would work to help unpuzzle readers, though ;-)

Thanks.