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

On Tue, Apr 02, 2013 at 08:02:13AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:

quoted

quoted

+	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.

Ah. I read it as "if we have a random object, we do not want to just say
"commit X", because it is not a commit.

-Peff