Re: [PATCH] sequencer: preserve commit messages

3 messages, 3 authors, 2016-06-15 · open the first message on its own page

Re: [PATCH] sequencer: preserve commit messages

From: Junio C Hamano <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-15 23:03:54

Michael J Gruber [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
Hmm, wouldn't it introduce a grave regression for users who
explicitly ask to clean crufty messages up (by setting their own
commit.cleanup configuration) if you unconditionally force
"--cleanup=verbatim" here?
That's what I meant by possible side-effects below.
...
But git cherry-pick without conflict should no re-cleanup the commit
message either, should it?
Hmm, but if it does not, wouldn't that countermand the wish of the
user who explicitly asked to clean crufty messages up by setting
their own commit.cleanup configuration?

Re: [PATCH] sequencer: preserve commit messages

From: Michael J Gruber <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-15 23:03:54

Junio C Hamano venit, vidit, dixit 24.02.2015 19:29:
Michael J Gruber [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
quoted
Hmm, wouldn't it introduce a grave regression for users who
explicitly ask to clean crufty messages up (by setting their own
commit.cleanup configuration) if you unconditionally force
"--cleanup=verbatim" here?
That's what I meant by possible side-effects below.
...
But git cherry-pick without conflict should no re-cleanup the commit
message either, should it?
Hmm, but if it does not, wouldn't that countermand the wish of the
user who explicitly asked to clean crufty messages up by setting
their own commit.cleanup configuration?
Note that "verbatim" is not the default - we cleanup commits even
without being asked to. And this makes sense for "git commit", of course.

I myself certainly expected "git cherry-pick" to transfer a commit as
verbatim as possible. "git rebase" preserves the commit message (at
least more than cherry-pick). What's the difference between them?
Technically the difference between commit-tree and commit, sure, but for
the user?

Michael

Re: [PATCH] sequencer: preserve commit messages

From: Christoph Anton Mitterer <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-15 23:03:55

On Tue, 2015-02-24 at 10:29 -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: 
Hmm, but if it does not, wouldn't that countermand the wish of the
user who explicitly asked to clean crufty messages up by setting
their own commit.cleanup configuration?
IMHO it's just wrong behaviour if the commit messages of people who
intentionally chose "verbatim" to get multiple newline, etc. are mangled
up, just to allow such people, that also intentionally chose some
non-default cleanup mode, but changed their mind later, allow easy clean
up.

Cheers,
Chris.
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help