Re: [PATCH] rebase --preserve-merges keeps empty merge commits
Martin von Zweigbergk wrote:
Show 6 quoted lines
> I'm working on a re-roll of
> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/205796
>
> and finally got around to including test cases for what you fixed in
> this patch. I want to make sure I'm testing what you fixed here. See
> questions below.
Thanks for that. I should have done this myself.
Show 28 quoted lines
> On Sat, Jan 12, 2013 at 12:46 PM, Phil Hord <hordp@cisco.com> wrote:
>> Since 90e1818f9a (git-rebase: add keep_empty flag, 2012-04-20)
>> 'git rebase --preserve-merges' fails to preserve empty merge commits
>> unless --keep-empty is also specified. Merge commits should be
>> preserved in order to preserve the structure of the rebased graph,
>> even if the merge commit does not introduce changes to the parent.
>>
>> Teach rebase not to drop merge commits only because they are empty.
> Consider a history like
>
> # a---b---c
> # \ \
> # d---l
> # \
> # e
> # \
> # C
>
> where 'l' is tree-same with 'd' and 'C' introduces the same change as 'c'.
>
> My test case runs 'git rebase -p e l' and expects the result to look like
>
> # a---b---c
> # \ \
> # d \
> # \ \
> # e---l
>
This is probably right, but it is not exactly the case that caused my itch. I think my branch looked like this:
# a---b---c # \ # d---f # \ \ # e---g # \ # l
where g is tree-same with f. That is, e merged with f, but all of e's changes were dropped in the merge.
So when I ran 'git rebase -p c l', I expected to end up with this:
# a---b---c # \ # d---f # \ \ # e---g # \ # l
But instead, I got an error because git-rebase--interactive.sh decided that g was empty, so it dropped it by commenting it out of the todo list:
pick d pick e pick f #pick g pick l
At the end of this attempt, I got some odd error about a cherry-pick have incorrect parameters or somesuch. I bisected the problem to a commit that clued me in to one of my commits being silently dropped. And that is specifically what I fixed.
This happened only because 'is_empty_commit' checks for tree-sameness with the first parent; it does not consider whether there are multiple parents. Perhaps it should.
Show 8 quoted lines
>> A special case which is not handled by this change is for a merge commit
>> whose parents are now the same commit because all the previous different
>> parents have been dropped as a result of this rebase or some previous
>> operation.
> And for this case, the test case runs 'git rebase -p C l'. Is that
> what you meant here?
>
> Before your patch, git would just say "Nothing to do"
Huh. That is worse than I thought.
Show 15 quoted lines
> and after your
> patch, we get
>
> # a---b---c
> # \ \
> # d \
> # \ \
> # e \
> # \ \
> # C---l
>
> As you say, your patch doesn't try to handle this case, but at least
> the new behavior seems better. I think we would ideally want the
> recreated 'l' to have only 'C' as parent in this case. Does that make
> sense?
This is not what I meant, but it is a very interesting corner case. I am not sure I have a solid opinion on what the result should be here. I feel like it should look the same as you show here, since neither 'c' nor 'C' is a candidate for collapsing during this rebase. But I may be missing some subtlety here.
Here is the corner case I was thinking of. I did not test this to see if this will happen, but I conceived that it might. Suppose you have this tree where
# a---b---c # \ # d---g---l # \ / # C
where 'C' introduced the same changes as 'c'.
When I execute 'git rebase -p l c', I expect that I will end up with this:
# a---b---c---d--- # \ \ # ---g---l
That is, 'C' gets skipped because it introduces the same changes already seen in 'c'. So 'g' now has two parents: 'd' and 'C^'. But 'C^' is 'd', so 'g' now has two parents, both of whom are 'd'.
I think it should collapse to this instead:
# a---b---c---d---g---l
I don't think this occurs because of my patch, and I am not sure it occurs at all. It is something that I considered when I was thinking of failure scenarios for my patch.
I expect it also may happen if 'C' is an already-empty commit, or if it is made empty after conflict resolution involving the user. I mentioned it because I thought my patch _could_ address this if my is_merge_commit test would also consider whether the parents are distinct from each other or not.
I hope this is clear, but please let me know if I made it too confusing.
Phil
Phil Hord
