path: root/t/
AgeCommit message (Collapse)Author
2018-09-13sequencer: fix --allow-empty-message behavior, make it smarterElijah Newren
In commit b00bf1c9a8dd ("git-rebase: make --allow-empty-message the default", 2018-06-27), several arguments were given for transplanting empty commits without halting and asking the user for confirmation on each commit. These arguments were incomplete because the logic clearly assumed the only cases under consideration were transplanting of commits with empty messages (see the comment about "There are two sources for commits with empty messages). It didn't discuss or even consider rewords, squashes, etc. where the user is explicitly asked for a new commit message and provides an empty one. (My bad, I totally should have thought about that at the time, but just didn't.) Rewords and squashes are significantly different, though, as described by SZEDER: Let's suppose you start an interactive rebase, choose a commit to squash, save the instruction sheet, rebase fires up your editor, and then you notice that you mistakenly chose the wrong commit to squash. What do you do, how do you abort? Before [that commit] you could clear the commit message, exit the editor, and then rebase would say "Aborting commit due to empty commit message.", and you get to run 'git rebase --abort', and start over. But [since that commit, ...] saving the commit message as is would let rebase continue and create a bunch of unnecessary objects, and then you would have to use the reflog to return to the pre-rebase state. Also, he states: The instructions in the commit message template, which is shown for 'reword' and 'squash', too, still say... # Please enter the commit message for your changes. Lines starting # with '#' will be ignored, and an empty message aborts the commit. These are sound arguments that when editing commit messages during a sequencer operation, that if the commit message is empty then the operation should halt and ask the user to correct. The arguments in commit b00bf1c9a8dd (referenced above) still apply when transplanting previously created commits with empty commit messages, so the sequencer should not halt for those. Furthermore, all rationale so far applies equally for cherry-pick as for rebase. Therefore, make the code default to --allow-empty-message when transplanting an existing commit, and to default to halting when the user is asked to edit a commit message and provides an empty one -- for both rebase and cherry-pick. Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <>
2018-06-27git-rebase: make --allow-empty-message the defaultElijah Newren
rebase backends currently behave differently with empty commit messages, largely as a side-effect of the different underlying commands on which they are based. am-based rebases apply commits with an empty commit message without stopping or requiring the user to specify an extra flag. (It is interesting to note that am-based rebases are the default rebase type, and no one has ever requested a --no-allow-empty-message flag to change this behavior.) merge-based and interactive-based rebases (which are ultimately based on git-commit), will currently halt on any such commits and require the user to manually specify what to do with the commit and continue. One possible rationale for the difference in behavior is that the purpose of an "am" based rebase is solely to transplant an existing history, while an "interactive" rebase is one whose purpose is to polish a series before making it publishable. Thus, stopping and asking for confirmation for a possible problem is more appropriate in the latter case. However, there are two problems with this rationale: 1) merge-based rebases are also non-interactive and there are multiple types of rebases that use the interactive machinery but are not explicitly interactive (e.g. when either --rebase-merges or --keep-empty are specified without --interactive). These rebases are also used solely to transplant an existing history, and thus also should default to --allow-empty-message. 2) this rationale only says that the user is more accepting of stopping in the case of an explicitly interactive rebase, not that stopping for this particular reason actually makes sense. Exploring whether it makes sense, requires backing up and analyzing the underlying commands... If git-commit did not error out on empty commits by default, accidental creation of commits with empty messages would be a very common occurrence (this check has caught me many times). Further, nearly all such empty commit messages would be considered an accidental error (as evidenced by a huge amount of documentation across version control systems and in various blog posts explaining how important commit messages are). A simple check for what would otherwise be a common error thus made a lot of sense, and git-commit gained an --allow-empty-message flag for special case overrides. This has made commits with empty messages very rare. There are two sources for commits with empty messages for rebase (and cherry-pick): (a) commits created in git where the user previously specified --allow-empty-message to git-commit, and (b) commits imported into git from other version control systems. In case (a), the user has already explicitly specified that there is something special about this commit that makes them not want to specify a commit message; forcing them to re-specify with every cherry-pick or rebase seems more likely to be infuriating than helpful. In case (b), the commit is highly unlikely to have been authored by the person who has imported the history and is doing the rebase or cherry-pick, and thus the user is unlikely to be the appropriate person to write a commit message for it. Stopping and expecting the user to modify the commit before proceeding thus seems counter-productive. Further, note that while empty commit messages was a common error case for git-commit to deal with, it is a rare case for rebase (or cherry-pick). The fact that it is rare raises the question of why it would be worth checking and stopping on this particular condition and not others. For example, why doesn't an interactive rebase automatically stop if the commit message's first line is 2000 columns long, or is missing a blank line after the first line, or has every line indented with five spaces, or any number of other myriad problems? Finally, note that if a user doing an interactive rebase does have the necessary knowledge to add a message for any such commit and wants to do so, it is rather simple for them to change the appropriate line from 'pick' to 'reword'. The fact that the subject is empty in the todo list that the user edits should even serve as a way to notify them. As far as I can tell, the fact that merge-based and interactive-based rebases stop on commits with empty commit messages is solely a by-product of having been based on git-commit. It went without notice for a long time precisely because such cases are rare. The rareness of this situation made it difficult to reason about, so when folks did eventually notice this behavior, they assumed it was there for a good reason and just added an --allow-empty-message flag. In my opinion, stopping on such messages not desirable in any of these cases, even the (explicitly) interactive case. Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <>
2018-02-07rebase: add --allow-empty-message optionGenki Sky
This option allows commits with empty commit messages to be rebased, matching the same option in git-commit and git-cherry-pick. While empty log messages are frowned upon, sometimes one finds them in older repositories (e.g. translated from another VCS [0]), or have other reasons for desiring them. The option is available in git-commit and git-cherry-pick, so it is natural to make other git tools play nicely with them. Adding this as an option allows the default to be "give the user a chance to fix", while not interrupting the user's workflow otherwise [1]. [0]: [1]: To implement this, add a new --allow-empty-message flag. Then propagate it to all calls of 'git commit', 'git cherry-pick', and 'git rebase--helper' within the rebase scripts. Signed-off-by: Genki Sky <> Reviewed-by: Johannes Schindelin <> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <>
2015-03-20t: fix trivial &&-chain breakageJeff King
These are tests which are missing a link in their &&-chain, but during a setup phase. We may fail to notice failure in commands that build the test environment, but these are typically not expected to fail at all (but it's still good to double-check that our test environment is what we expect). Signed-off-by: Jeff King <> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <>
2012-06-26am --rebasing: get patch body from commit, not from mailboxMartin von Zweigbergk
Rebasing a commit that contains a diff in the commit message results in a failure with output such as First, rewinding head to replay your work on top of it... Applying: My cool patch. fatal: sha1 information is lacking or useless (app/controllers/settings_controller.rb). Repository lacks necessary blobs to fall back on 3-way merge. Cannot fall back to three-way merge. Patch failed at 0001 My cool patch. The reason is that 'git rebase' without -p/-i/-m internally calls 'git format-patch' and pipes the output to 'git am --rebasing', which has no way of knowing what is a real patch and what is a commit message that contains a patch. Make 'git am' while in --rebasing mode get the patch body from the commit object instead of extracting it from the mailbox. Patch by Junio, test case and commit log message by Martin. Reported-by: anikey <> Helped-by: Junio C Hamano <> Signed-off-by: Martin von Zweigbergk <> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <>
2008-03-13add test_cmp function for test scriptsJeff King
Many scripts compare actual and expected output using "diff -u". This is nicer than "cmp" because the output shows how the two differ. However, not all versions of diff understand -u, leading to unnecessary test failure. This adds a test_cmp function to the test scripts and switches all "diff -u" invocations to use it. The function uses the contents of "$GIT_TEST_CMP" to compare its arguments; the default is "diff -u". On systems with a less-capable diff, you can do: GIT_TEST_CMP=cmp make test Signed-off-by: Jeff King <> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <>
2007-07-30rebase: try not to munge commit log messageJunio C Hamano
This makes rebase/am keep the original commit log message better, even when it does not conform to "single line paragraph to say what it does, then explain and defend why it is a good change in later paragraphs" convention. This change is a two-edged sword. While the earlier behaviour would make such commit log messages more friendly to readers who expect to get the birds-eye view with oneline summary formats, users who primarily use git as a way to interact with foreign SCM systems would not care much about the convenience of oneline git log tools, but care more about preserving their own convention. This changes their commits less useful to readers who read them with git tools while keeping them more consistent with the foreign SCM systems they interact with. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <>