Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] builtin/rebase.c: Emit warning when rebasing without a forkpoint

[Wesley <wesleys@opperschaap.net>]

On 9/2/23 19:37, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Wesley Schwengle <wesleys@opperschaap.net> writes:

Thanks for the feedback. I won't continue the patch series because some 
of the feedback you've given below.

>> However doing so would trigger a different
>> kind of behavior.  `git rebase <upstream>' behaves as if
>> `--no-fork-point' was supplied and without it behaves as if
>> `--fork-point' was supplied. This behavior can result in a loss of
>> commits and can surprise users.
> 
> No, what is causing the loss in this particular case is allowing to
> use the fork-point heuristics.  If you do not want it, you can
> either explicitly give --no-fork-point or <upstream> (or both if you
> feel that you need to absolutely be clear).  Or you can set the
> configuration to "false" to disable this "auto" behaviour.

Isn't that what I'm saying? At least I'm trying to say what you are saying.

> By the way, while I do agree with the need to make users _aware_ of
> the "auto" behaviour [*1*], I am not yet convinced that there is a
> need to change the default in the future.

In that case, I'll abort this patch series. I don't agree with the `git 
rebase' in the lazy form and `git rebase <upstream>' acting differently, 
but I already have the rebase.forkpoint set to false to counter it.

> It might be better to extend the documentation instead, which will
> not distract those who are using the tool just fine already.

That is with the current viewpoints the best option I think.

>> +	diff -qw expect err &&
> 
> Why not "test_cmp expect actual" like everybody else?

As said in the initial patch series and the comment above the tests:

> There is one point where I'm a little confused, the `test_cmp' function in the
> testsuite doesn't like the output that is captured from STDERR, it seems that
> there is a difference in regards to whitespace. My workaround is to use
> `diff -wq`. I don't know if this is an accepted solution.

That's why.

Cheers,
Wesley

-- 
Wesley

Why not both?