threads / discuss / 53121

Git 2.26 rebase.backend change issue

Subject: Git 2.26 rebase.backend change issue

## tl;dr

3 messages between Mar 28, 2020 and Mar 28, 2020.

replies: 2people: 2as markdown or json

Bastian Buchholz· Mar 28, 2020, 08:21 UTC · lore

Hello,

Just wanted to report that I am running into issues with the git 2.26 `rebase.backend` change. I am a maintainer on https://github.com/FredrikNoren/ungit which is a UI for git using a http server / browser architecture. We are using `git rebase` in non interactive mode (e.g. not specifying `-i` or `--interactive`) on the server and with git 2.26 this fails because it seems that it now runs in interactive mode by default. It tries to an editor on `git rebase --continue`. Specifying `-c rebase.backend=apply` fixes our issue see https://github.com/FredrikNoren/ungit/issues/1301

It would be great if the new merge backend would also support a non interactive mode e.g. by respecting the `-i` or `--interactive` option,

Thanks and regards Bastian Buchholz

Jeff King· Mar 28, 2020, 14:18 UTC · re: Bastian Buchholz · lore

Re: Git 2.26 rebase.backend change issue

On Sat, Mar 28, 2020 at 09:21:08AM +0100, Bastian Buchholz wrote:

Show 10 quoted lines

> Just wanted to report that I am running into issues with the git 2.26
> `rebase.backend` change.
> I am a maintainer on https://github.com/FredrikNoren/ungit which is a
> UI for git using a http server / browser architecture.
> We are using `git rebase` in non interactive mode (e.g. not specifying
> `-i` or `--interactive`) on the server and with git 2.26 this fails
> because it seems that it now runs in interactive mode by default. It
> tries to an editor on `git rebase --continue`.
> Specifying `-c rebase.backend=apply` fixes our issue see
> https://github.com/FredrikNoren/ungit/issues/1301

I don't think --interactive is relevant here; the features triggered by that option (i.e., the ability to tweak the instruction list) are different from the notion that rebase would never interact with the user at all.

There's more discussion of this change in the thread at:

  https://lore.kernel.org/git/20200310174017.GA549010@coredump.intra.peff.net/

The simplest fix is likely to set GIT_EDITOR=: in your environment when you don't want the user to ever be presented with an editor.

-Peff

Bastian Buchholz· Mar 28, 2020, 14:50 UTC · re: Jeff King · lore

Re: Git 2.26 rebase.backend change issue

Yes, the issue we have is the same described in the other thread. I will try using GIT_EDITOR=: instead.

Thanks!

On Sat, Mar 28, 2020 at 3:18 PM Jeff King <peff@peff.net> wrote:

Show 27 quoted lines

>
> On Sat, Mar 28, 2020 at 09:21:08AM +0100, Bastian Buchholz wrote:
>
> > Just wanted to report that I am running into issues with the git 2.26
> > `rebase.backend` change.
> > I am a maintainer on https://github.com/FredrikNoren/ungit which is a
> > UI for git using a http server / browser architecture.
> > We are using `git rebase` in non interactive mode (e.g. not specifying
> > `-i` or `--interactive`) on the server and with git 2.26 this fails
> > because it seems that it now runs in interactive mode by default. It
> > tries to an editor on `git rebase --continue`.
> > Specifying `-c rebase.backend=apply` fixes our issue see
> > https://github.com/FredrikNoren/ungit/issues/1301
>
> I don't think --interactive is relevant here; the features triggered by
> that option (i.e., the ability to tweak the instruction list) are
> different from the notion that rebase would never interact with the user
> at all.
>
> There's more discussion of this change in the thread at:
>
>   https://lore.kernel.org/git/20200310174017.GA549010@coredump.intra.peff.net/
>
> The simplest fix is likely to set GIT_EDITOR=: in your environment when
> you don't want the user to ever be presented with an editor.
>
> -Peff