Re: [PATCH 1/3] merge: a random object may not necssarily be a commit

Jeff King [off-list ref] writes:

On Mon, Apr 01, 2013 at 12:57:17PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:

quoted

The user could have said "git merge $(git rev-parse v1.0.0)"; we
shouldn't mark it as "Merge commit '15999998fb...'" as the merge
name, even though such an invocation might be crazy.

We could even read the "tag " header from the tag object and replace
the object name the user gave us, but let's not lose the information
by doing so, at least not yet.

Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <redacted>
---
 builtin/merge.c | 13 +++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+)

diff --git a/builtin/merge.c b/builtin/merge.c
index 0ec8f0d..990e90c 100644
--- a/builtin/merge.c
+++ b/builtin/merge.c

@@ -516,6 +516,19 @@ static void merge_name(const char *remote, struct strbuf *msg)
 		strbuf_release(&line);
 		goto cleanup;
 	}
+
+	if (remote_head->util) {
+		struct merge_remote_desc *desc;
+		desc = merge_remote_util(remote_head);
+		if (desc && desc->obj && desc->obj->type == OBJ_TAG) {
+			strbuf_addf(msg, "%s\t\t%s '%s'\n",
+				    sha1_to_hex(desc->obj->sha1),
+				    typename(desc->obj->type),
+				    remote);
+			goto cleanup;
+		}
+	}
+
 	strbuf_addf(msg, "%s\t\tcommit '%s'\n",
 		sha1_to_hex(remote_head->object.sha1), remote);

I guess there is no other object type besides OBJ_TAG and OBJ_COMMIT
that would yield something we could merge, but it feels weird that you
check only for OBJ_TAG here, and otherwise still say "commit". Would the
intent be more clear if it just said:

  if (desc && desc->obj && desc->obj->type != OBJ_COMMIT) {
          ...

?

I suspect not.

The point of the added code is that it knows we want to special case
merging a tag object, and it wants to keep any other case behaving
the same as before.