From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.1 (2015-04-28) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.1 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.1 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D70D1F85A for ; Tue, 10 Jul 2018 13:24:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933229AbeGJNYZ (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Jul 2018 09:24:25 -0400 Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.25]:39505 "EHLO out1-smtp.messagingengine.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933145AbeGJNYY (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Jul 2018 09:24:24 -0400 Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9AAC5218B4; Tue, 10 Jul 2018 09:24:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 10 Jul 2018 09:24:23 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=living180.net; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from :in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to :x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; bh=iL+pNUuWiC8K4AECY hh9WFStpA8lWbo8AkxvFG68UVQ=; b=AqxT0/dOudV0IBVa+6IJwSlAB1nSWTcPY JKZmON8vUp1SWcs9hVYI3bGfKFgglfYYrj/lF0IW93ZP5jG0HJdSse7d9XXoTH/U GxxvHjMn0wh5/EiHTDGxIEDo9ixpZpxLUDkESjDc8Psi01fq/IZBQ+3PvlB+OuGT dtOYUMpJ+ugX1rgQc8zuXlhVaLKsKMjU7CHmijNG8Sc5tTNVRNHPBzA8OHmORHc3 WnvBRZGVUoU8rwX3YtVWtIU0E3DZBhfrv1E/evAQmQ+P1YIIYcDgAS9YG+RBw2Pe owQ3Zh7RxwYySpZlyyBX2DlO0sFonOn+mQSegq0B31uciDYPNTh0Q== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; bh=iL+pNU uWiC8K4AECYhh9WFStpA8lWbo8AkxvFG68UVQ=; b=WPjfh2t9f70y9ow+q1KC2V p1HKJgRTVkS0xaOnE/hTfPgtq2SR35im4aFofrzCbI75XhYt/qd459C9t8LJeFND O2NplV2brErLF3Gb9vG0r6xMcGOctda7h9LgVfIDWH5L8fVtt2ET6ZUzwTqXCI5G fHUQLgc1kuJuB0fIkf6/6HE3zgK6QkTAgAksvpedUJJfeG4rXPGAT5Y6PcEBQBfW y70RnoNjOcbZkkBZeu5IJIzlZhWp65CQwqS2lH/Vy3IEE2BXc7NHtcpi7dQLyu2W lVNIx+7JBsh4J9p/2bURGhKKQreFgf5LUorMZFcc+W8e50bDJrsqBUpdPtkBYYOQ == X-ME-Proxy: X-ME-Sender: Received: from [0.0.0.0] (unknown [173.199.115.247]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 79E0BE4516; Tue, 10 Jul 2018 09:24:21 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Fix --rebase-merges with custom commentChar To: Johannes Schindelin , Aaron Schrab Cc: git@vger.kernel.org References: <20180708184110.14792-1-dharding@living180.net> From: Daniel Harding Message-ID: Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2018 16:24:19 +0300 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.9.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 09 Jul 2018 at 10:53:14 +0300, Johannes Schindelin wrote> > On Sun, 8 Jul 2018, Daniel Harding wrote: > >> I have core.commentChar set in my .gitconfig, and when I tried to run >> git rebase -i -r, I received an error message like the following: >> >> error: invalid line 3: # Branch >> >> To fix this, I updated sequencer.c to use the configured commentChar >> for the Branch comments. I also tweaked the tests in t3430 to >> verify todo list generation with a custom commentChar. I'm not sure >> if I took the right approach with that, or if it would be better to >> add additional tests for that case, so feel free to >> tweak/replace/ignore the second commit as appropriate. > > Nothing is as powerful as an idea whose time has come. Or as a patch whose > time has come, I guess: > > https://public-inbox.org/git/20180628020414.25036-1-aaron@schrab.com/ Oops, I should have done a bit a searching before I tossed off a patch. Thanks Johannes for the pointer. > AFAICT the remaining task was to send a new revision of the patch, with > the commit message touched up, to reflect the analysis that it handles the > `auto` setting well. > > Your patch adds a regression test in addition, which is very nice. > > So maybe you can coordinate with Aaron about that first patch? I really > think that the commit message needs to explain why the `auto` setting is > not a problem here. Aaron, how would you like to move forward on this? I don't want to take credit from you since you were the first to post the patch. If you would like to post a new version of your patch with the commit message updated based on the feedback, I can then add my tests to go with it. Alternatively if you'd like me to run with this I can repost the patch with you as the author along with an updated commit message and my name in a "Commit-message-by:" line. Let me know your thoughts. If I don't hear from you in a couple of days, I'll go ahead and repost the patch as I described. Thanks, Daniel Harding