From: Phillip Wood <phillip.wood123@gmail.com>
To: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>,
Phillip Wood via GitGitGadget <gitgitgadget@gmail.com>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, "Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason" <avarab@gmail.com>,
"Johannes Schindelin" <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de>,
"Phillip Wood" <phillip.wood@dunelm.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 11/11] rebase: dereference tags
Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2021 14:27:17 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <8c78eac4-676b-7bd1-0282-d52eb20f87ce@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5ef402a4-3477-6227-e08c-041ed373313e@gmail.com>
On 14/09/2021 11:17, Phillip Wood wrote:
> Hi Junio
>
> On 13/09/2021 23:58, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> "Phillip Wood via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> From: Phillip Wood <phillip.wood@dunelm.org.uk>
>>>
>>> Aborting a rebase stated with 'git rebase <upstream> <tag-object>'
>>> should checkout the commit pointed to by <tag-object>. Instead it gives
>>
>> I am not sure if "should checkout the commit pointed to by." is a
>> good description. It does not seem to be sufficiently justified.
>
> My logic was that as we handle commits here it would make sense to
> handle tags as well - I discovered that this did not work when I
> happened to use an annotated tag as the <branch> argument to rebase the
> commits pointed to by the tag and was surprised it did not work when we
> happily accept tags for <upstream> and --onto.
>
>> Did we auto-peel in scripted version of "git rebase" and is this a
>> regression when the command was rewritten in C?
>
> As far as I can tell we have never peeled tags here
That's a bit misleading. We have never peeled a tag given as <branch>
when we parse it. In the scripted version we just passed the tag oid
along to rev-list, checkout and reset and they peeled it. So I think
this is actually a regression in the builtin rebase. I'll update the
commit message to reflect that unless we feel that allowing a tag for
<branch> is a mistake and we should be erroring out to avoid the
possible confusion of the tag not being rebased, only the commits it
points to.
Sorry for the confusion
Phillip
>> If that is not the case, this topic is perhaps slightly below
>> borderline "meh" to me. The optional "first switch to this <branch>
>> before doing anything" command-line argument in
>>
>> git rebase [--onto <there>] <upstream> [<branch>]
>>
>> was meant to give a branch, and because we treat detached HEAD as
>> almost first-class citizen when dealing with branch-ish things, we
>> allowed
>>
>> git rebase master my-topic^0
>>
>> to try rebasing my-topic on detached HEAD without losing the
>> original. In other words, you had to be explicit that you meant the
>> commit object, not a ref that points at it, to trigger this "rebase
>> detached" feature. The same thing for tags.
>>
>> git rebase master v12.3^0
>>
>> would be a proper request to rebase the history leading to that
>> commit. Without the peeling, it appears the user is asking to
>> update the ref that can be uniquely identified with "v12.3", but we
>> do not want to rebase a tag.
>
> I wrote this patch as I felt it was an artificial distinction to require
> that <branch> is a branch-ish thing rather than a commit-ish thing.
> Rebase already peels <upstream> and --onto so it feels inconsistent not
> to do it for <branch>. I guess the counter argument to that is users may
> be confused and start complaining that the tag itself is not rebased.
>
>> It would have been a different story if we had a problem when a tag
>> is given to "--onto <there>", but I do not think this topic is about
>> that case.
>
> No "--onto <tag>" works fine. We also accept a tag object for upstream
> without requiring the user to peel it for us.
>
>> Having said that, even if we decide that we shouldn't accept the tag
>> object and require peeled form to avoid mistakes (instead of
>> silently peeling the tag ourselves), I do agree that
>>
>>> error: update_ref failed for ref 'HEAD': cannot update ref
>>> 'HEAD': trying to write non-commit object
>>> 710d743b2b9892457fdcc3970f397e6ec07447e0 to branch 'HEAD'
>>>
>>
>> is a bad error message for this. It should be something like
>>
>> error: cannot rebase a tag
>>
>> perhaps.
>
> We could do that if we're worried that users would be confused by the
> tag not being rebased if we started automatically peeling <branch>. (I'm
> kind of leaning in that direction at the moment having read your email)
>
> Best Wishes
>
> Phillip
>
>> But if we auto-peeled in an old version, I do not mind this series
>> (but let's drop pointless "clean-up" that is not, like what was
>> pointed out by Réne). In such a case, the first paragraph should
>> say, instead of "should checkout", that "we used to do X, but commit
>> Y broke us and now we die with an error message".
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-09-14 13:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 55+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-09-08 9:49 [PATCH 00/11] rebase: dereference tags Phillip Wood via GitGitGadget
2021-09-08 9:49 ` [PATCH 01/11] t3407: run tests in $TEST_DIRECTORY Phillip Wood via GitGitGadget
2021-09-08 10:41 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2021-09-08 9:49 ` [PATCH 02/11] t3407: use test_commit Phillip Wood via GitGitGadget
2021-09-08 10:39 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2021-09-08 9:49 ` [PATCH 03/11] t3407: use test_cmp_rev Phillip Wood via GitGitGadget
2021-09-08 10:40 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2021-09-08 13:42 ` Phillip Wood
2021-09-08 9:49 ` [PATCH 04/11] t3407: rename a variable Phillip Wood via GitGitGadget
2021-09-08 9:49 ` [PATCH 05/11] t3407: use test_path_is_missing Phillip Wood via GitGitGadget
2021-09-08 9:49 ` [PATCH 06/11] t3407: strengthen rebase --abort tests Phillip Wood via GitGitGadget
2021-09-08 10:42 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2021-09-08 9:49 ` [PATCH 07/11] t3407: rework rebase --quit tests Phillip Wood via GitGitGadget
2021-09-08 9:49 ` [PATCH 08/11] rebase: remove redundant strbuf Phillip Wood via GitGitGadget
2021-09-09 10:35 ` Johannes Schindelin
2021-09-08 9:49 ` [PATCH 09/11] rebase: use our standard error return value Phillip Wood via GitGitGadget
2021-09-08 9:49 ` [PATCH 10/11] rebase: use lookup_commit_reference_by_name() Phillip Wood via GitGitGadget
2021-09-08 9:49 ` [PATCH 11/11] rebase: dereference tags Phillip Wood via GitGitGadget
2021-09-08 10:45 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2021-09-13 15:19 ` [PATCH v2 00/11] " Phillip Wood via GitGitGadget
2021-09-13 15:19 ` [PATCH v2 01/11] t3407: run tests in $TEST_DIRECTORY Phillip Wood via GitGitGadget
2021-09-13 15:19 ` [PATCH v2 02/11] t3407: use test_commit Phillip Wood via GitGitGadget
2021-09-13 15:19 ` [PATCH v2 03/11] t3407: use test_cmp_rev Phillip Wood via GitGitGadget
2021-09-13 15:19 ` [PATCH v2 04/11] t3407: rename a variable Phillip Wood via GitGitGadget
2021-09-13 15:19 ` [PATCH v2 05/11] t3407: use test_path_is_missing Phillip Wood via GitGitGadget
2021-09-13 15:19 ` [PATCH v2 06/11] t3407: strengthen rebase --abort tests Phillip Wood via GitGitGadget
2021-09-13 15:19 ` [PATCH v2 07/11] t3407: rework rebase --quit tests Phillip Wood via GitGitGadget
2021-09-13 15:19 ` [PATCH v2 08/11] rebase: remove redundant strbuf Phillip Wood via GitGitGadget
2021-09-13 18:34 ` René Scharfe
2021-09-13 22:40 ` Junio C Hamano
2021-09-14 10:31 ` Phillip Wood
2021-09-14 10:33 ` Phillip Wood
2021-09-13 15:19 ` [PATCH v2 09/11] rebase: use our standard error return value Phillip Wood via GitGitGadget
2021-09-13 15:19 ` [PATCH v2 10/11] rebase: use lookup_commit_reference_by_name() Phillip Wood via GitGitGadget
2021-09-13 15:19 ` [PATCH v2 11/11] rebase: dereference tags Phillip Wood via GitGitGadget
2021-09-13 22:58 ` Junio C Hamano
2021-09-14 10:17 ` Phillip Wood
2021-09-14 13:27 ` Phillip Wood [this message]
2021-09-14 16:29 ` Junio C Hamano
2021-09-14 3:42 ` Elijah Newren
2021-09-14 9:48 ` Sergey Organov
2021-09-14 9:58 ` Phillip Wood
2021-09-14 4:02 ` [PATCH v2 00/11] " Elijah Newren
2021-09-21 10:23 ` [PATCH v3 00/10] " Phillip Wood via GitGitGadget
2021-09-21 10:23 ` [PATCH v3 01/10] t3407: run tests in $TEST_DIRECTORY Phillip Wood via GitGitGadget
2021-09-21 10:23 ` [PATCH v3 02/10] t3407: use test_commit Phillip Wood via GitGitGadget
2021-09-21 10:24 ` [PATCH v3 03/10] t3407: use test_cmp_rev Phillip Wood via GitGitGadget
2021-09-21 10:24 ` [PATCH v3 04/10] t3407: rename a variable Phillip Wood via GitGitGadget
2021-09-21 10:24 ` [PATCH v3 05/10] t3407: use test_path_is_missing Phillip Wood via GitGitGadget
2021-09-21 10:24 ` [PATCH v3 06/10] t3407: strengthen rebase --abort tests Phillip Wood via GitGitGadget
2021-09-21 10:24 ` [PATCH v3 07/10] t3407: rework rebase --quit tests Phillip Wood via GitGitGadget
2021-09-21 10:24 ` [PATCH v3 08/10] rebase: use our standard error return value Phillip Wood via GitGitGadget
2021-09-21 10:24 ` [PATCH v3 09/10] rebase: use lookup_commit_reference_by_name() Phillip Wood via GitGitGadget
2021-09-21 10:24 ` [PATCH v3 10/10] rebase: dereference tags Phillip Wood via GitGitGadget
2021-09-24 1:26 ` [PATCH v3 00/10] " Elijah Newren
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=8c78eac4-676b-7bd1-0282-d52eb20f87ce@gmail.com \
--to=phillip.wood123@gmail.com \
--cc=Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de \
--cc=avarab@gmail.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitgitgadget@gmail.com \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=phillip.wood@dunelm.org.uk \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://80x24.org/mirrors/git.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).