# [PATCH/RFC 0/2] custom format for interactive rebase todo 5 messages from 2014-09-09 to 2014-09-10. Participants: William Clifford, Junio C Hamano. Thread: https://gitlist.dev/t/37520 ## William Clifford, 2014-09-09 04:47 Subject: [PATCH/RFC 0/2] custom format for interactive rebase todo Message-ID: <864mwhi9qu.fsf@gmail.com> URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/864mwhi9qu.fsf%40gmail.com ``` I'm sorry if this shows up twice. I messed up the first time. I was recently in a situation of rebasing a topic branch with many commits by several colleagues and I thought it would be useful if I could see the author of the commit in the commit table in the rebase todo file. I wanted try to squash commits by the same author where appropriate. With the help of Matt Boeh, we figured out how to patch in custom formatting of this line, and I have been trying it out for the last couple of weeks and it seems to work pretty well. A couple of examples: - `git config sequence.format "%<(12,trunc)%ae %s"` - `git config sequence.format "%s <%aN %aE>"` - `git config sequence.format "%s%n%%n%b"` The first one tries to conserve linespace, which is a good idea for these formats. The second one could be really long but otherwise harmless. I'm unsure what would happen if I tried to rebase with the third style unedited or uncommented. I'm wary of casually testing it. It does not seem like a good idea, and should perhaps be discouraged. Please let me know what you think. William Clifford (2): Add sequence.format to interactive rebase Add documentation of sequence.format to interactive rebase Documentation/config.txt | 9 +++++++++ git-rebase--interactive.sh | 14 +++++++++++++- 2 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) -- William Clifford Message-ID: <867g1dia81.fsf@gmail.com> X-Draft-From: ("INBOX") ``` ## Junio C Hamano, 2014-09-09 16:58 Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC 0/2] custom format for interactive rebase todo Message-ID: URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/xmqqtx4gloii.fsf%40gitster.dls.corp.google.com In-Reply-To: <864mwhi9qu.fsf@gmail.com> ``` William Clifford writes: > A couple of examples: > > - `git config sequence.format "%<(12,trunc)%ae %s"` > - `git config sequence.format "%s <%aN %aE>"` > - `git config sequence.format "%s%n%%n%b"` > ... I'm unsure what would happen if I tried to rebase with the > third style unedited or uncommented. It should be simply forbidden. The body part may have a line that is similar enough (i.e. starting with one of the command words and then a hexadecimal string) to confuse the sequencing machinery. Other than that safety issue, I am not fundamentally opposed to the idea. As to the implementation in 1/2, your unconditional use of ">%h" is wrong (you would end up including the commits from the left side). Use '%m' instead of a hardcoded '>', perhaps? ``` ## Junio C Hamano, 2014-09-09 17:07 Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC 0/2] custom format for interactive rebase todo Message-ID: URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/xmqqha0glo3j.fsf%40gitster.dls.corp.google.com In-Reply-To: ``` Junio C Hamano writes: > William Clifford writes: > >> A couple of examples: >> >> - `git config sequence.format "%<(12,trunc)%ae %s"` >> - `git config sequence.format "%s <%aN %aE>"` >> - `git config sequence.format "%s%n%%n%b"` >> ... I'm unsure what would happen if I tried to rebase with the >> third style unedited or uncommented. > > It should be simply forbidden. The body part may have a line that > is similar enough (i.e. starting with one of the command words and > then a hexadecimal string) to confuse the sequencing machinery. > > Other than that safety issue, I am not fundamentally opposed to the > idea. > > As to the implementation in 1/2, your unconditional use of ">%h" is > wrong (you would end up including the commits from the left side). > > Use '%m' instead of a hardcoded '>', perhaps? Also, I do not think you want to make the prepending of "%m%h " conditional. If the user for whatever silly reason asks to use a format "%m%h %m%h %m%h", let her have that _after_ the "%m%h " the machinery needs to operate, i.e. "%m%h %m%h %m%h %m%h". It is far easier to explain to the users and you can lose three lines from the second patch. ``` ## William Clifford, 2014-09-10 14:48 Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC 0/2] custom format for interactive rebase todo Message-ID: URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/CAFY06%3DjqNEo%3DG7HFjHn-8i8tLMdHwg3yZdwidW_j%3D_Tw90tnhQ%40mail.gmail.com In-Reply-To: ``` Thanks! I've set it up just this way and it seems to work fine. It turns out the formatted string is processed by the shell `read` later on, which happens to ignore everything after the first line, so it seems like it should be safe. But doing something explicit about it seems like a good idea in this case. I will see about actually reading in additional lines and raising an error, but it occurs to me that if I can read in the additional lines, I could also insert them as comments, and then it should be as safe as any of the other comments inserted in the rebase todo. In any case I will look into it and prepare another patch. On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 10:07 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Junio C Hamano writes: > >> William Clifford writes: >> >>> A couple of examples: >>> >>> - `git config sequence.format "%<(12,trunc)%ae %s"` >>> - `git config sequence.format "%s <%aN %aE>"` >>> - `git config sequence.format "%s%n%%n%b"` >>> ... I'm unsure what would happen if I tried to rebase with the >>> third style unedited or uncommented. >> >> It should be simply forbidden. The body part may have a line that >> is similar enough (i.e. starting with one of the command words and >> then a hexadecimal string) to confuse the sequencing machinery. >> >> Other than that safety issue, I am not fundamentally opposed to the >> idea. >> >> As to the implementation in 1/2, your unconditional use of ">%h" is >> wrong (you would end up including the commits from the left side). >> >> Use '%m' instead of a hardcoded '>', perhaps? > > Also, I do not think you want to make the prepending of "%m%h " > conditional. If the user for whatever silly reason asks to use a > format "%m%h %m%h %m%h", let her have that _after_ the "%m%h " the > machinery needs to operate, i.e. "%m%h %m%h %m%h %m%h". It is far > easier to explain to the users and you can lose three lines from the > second patch. -- William Clifford ``` ## Junio C Hamano, 2014-09-10 17:11 Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC 0/2] custom format for interactive rebase todo Message-ID: URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/xmqqy4trh02s.fsf%40gitster.dls.corp.google.com In-Reply-To: ``` William Clifford writes: > I will see about actually reading > in additional lines and raising an error, but it occurs to me that if > I can read in the additional lines, I could also insert them as > comments, and then it should be as safe as any of the other comments > inserted in the rebase todo. ;-) ```