git@vger.kernel.org mailing list mirror (one of many)
 help / color / mirror / code / Atom feed
From: Wink Saville <wink@saville.com>
To: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Cc: Git List <git@vger.kernel.org>,
	Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>,
	Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3.1 2/9 2/2] rebase-interactive: Do not automatically run code
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2018 15:45:48 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAKk8isrLrE+sC0Rfv6WUzjziSqGzRgk2xTOh-OKCeEpdxsPfkA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <xmqqefkbltxv.fsf@gitster-ct.c.googlers.com>

On Thu, Mar 22, 2018 at 1:46 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
> Wink Saville <wink@saville.com> writes:
>
>> At Junio's suggestion have git-rebase--am and git-rebase--merge work the
>> same way as git-rebase--interactive. This makes the code more consistent.
>
> I mumbled about making git_rebase__$type functions for all $type in
> my previous response, but that was done without even looking at
> git-rebase--$type.sh scriptlets.  It seems that they all shared the
> same structure (i.e. define git_rebase__$type function and then at
> the end clla it) and were consistent already.  It was the v3 that
> changed the calling convention only for interactive, which made it
> inconsistent.  If you are making git-rebase.sh call the helper shell
> function for all backend $type, you are keeping the existing
> consistency.
>
> This is no longer about "interactive" alone, though, and need to be
> retitled ;-)
>
>> Signed-off-by: Wink Saville <wink@saville.com>
>> ---
>>  git-rebase--am.sh          | 17 ++++++-----------
>>  git-rebase--interactive.sh |  8 +++++++-
>>  git-rebase--merge.sh       | 17 ++++++-----------
>>  git-rebase.sh              | 13 ++++---------
>>  4 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 32 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/git-rebase--am.sh b/git-rebase--am.sh
>> index be3f06892..47dc69ed9 100644
>> --- a/git-rebase--am.sh
>> +++ b/git-rebase--am.sh
>> @@ -4,17 +4,14 @@
>>  # Copyright (c) 2010 Junio C Hamano.
>>  #
>>
>> +# The whole contents of this file is loaded by dot-sourcing it from
>> +# inside another shell function, hence no shebang on the first line
>> +# and then the caller invokes git_rebase__am.
>
> Is this comment necessary?

Removed

>
>> +# Previously this file was sourced and it called itself to get this
>> +# was to get around a bug in older (9.x) versions of FreeBSD.
>
> ECANTPARSE.  But this probably is no longer needed here, even though
> it may make sense to explain why this comment is no longer relevant
> in the log message.  E.g.
>
>         The backend scriptlets for "git rebase" are structured in a
>         bit unusual way for historical reasons.  Originally, it was
>         designed in such a way that dot-sourcing them from "git
>         rebase" would be sufficient to invoke the specific backend.
>         When it was discovered that some shell implementations
>         (e.g. FreeBSD 9.x) misbehaved by exiting when "return" is
>         executed at the top level of a dot-sourced script (the
>         original was expecting that the control returns to the next
>         command in "git rebase" after dot-sourcing the scriptlet),
>         the whole body of git-rebase--$backend.sh was made into a
>         shell function git_rebase__$backend and then the scriptlet
>         was made to call this function at the end as a workaround.
>
>         Move the call to "git rebase" side, instead of at the end of
>         each scriptlet.  This would give us a more normal
>         arrangement where a function library lives in a scriptlet
>         that is dot-sourced, and then these helper functions are
>         called by the script that dot-sourced the scriptlet.
>
>         While at it, remove the large comment that explains why this
>         rather unusual structure was used from these scriptlets.
>
> or something like that in the log message, and then we can get rid
> of these in-code comments, I would think.

Updated commit message

>>  git_rebase__am () {
>> -
>> +echo "git_rebase_am:+" 1>&5
>
> debuggin'?  I see similar stuff left in other parts (snipped) of
> this patch.

Removed debugging :(

Currently I'm not rebasing the other commits (3..9)
to reduce the amount of work I have to do in each
review cycle, is that OK?

Also, will you merge commits 1 and 2 before the other
commits or is the procedure to merge the complete set
at once?

  reply	other threads:[~2018-03-22 22:46 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-03-22 16:57 [RFC PATCH v3 0/9] rebase-interactive: Wink Saville
2018-03-22 16:57 ` [RFC PATCH v3 1/9] Simplify pick_on_preserving_merges Wink Saville
2018-03-22 16:57 ` [RFC PATCH v3 2/9] Call git_rebase__interactive from run_specific_rebase Wink Saville
2018-03-22 18:27   ` Junio C Hamano
2018-03-22 19:28     ` Wink Saville
2018-03-22 20:03       ` [RFC PATCH v3.1 2/9 2/2] rebase-interactive: Do not automatically run code Wink Saville
2018-03-22 20:46         ` Junio C Hamano
2018-03-22 22:45           ` Wink Saville [this message]
2018-03-23  2:06             ` Junio C Hamano
2018-03-22 16:57 ` [RFC PATCH v3 3/9] Indent function git_rebase__interactive Wink Saville
2018-03-23 17:43   ` Johannes Schindelin
2018-03-22 16:57 ` [RFC PATCH v3 4/9] Extract functions out of git_rebase__interactive Wink Saville
2018-03-22 16:57 ` [RFC PATCH v3 5/9] Use new functions in git_rebase__interactive Wink Saville
2018-03-23 17:42   ` Johannes Schindelin
2018-03-23 18:24     ` Junio C Hamano
2018-03-23 20:09       ` Wink Saville
2018-03-22 16:57 ` [RFC PATCH v3 6/9] Add and use git_rebase__interactive__preserve_merges Wink Saville
2018-03-22 16:57 ` [RFC PATCH v3 7/9] Remove unused code paths from git_rebase__interactive Wink Saville
2018-03-22 16:57 ` [RFC PATCH v3 8/9] Remove unused code paths from git_rebase__interactive__preserve_merges Wink Saville
2018-03-22 16:57 ` [RFC PATCH v3 9/9] Remove merges_option and a blank line Wink Saville

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=CAKk8isrLrE+sC0Rfv6WUzjziSqGzRgk2xTOh-OKCeEpdxsPfkA@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=wink@saville.com \
    --cc=Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=gitster@pobox.com \
    --cc=sunshine@sunshineco.com \
    /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).