Genki Sky <s...@genki.is> writes: > --> Motivation > > commit 4bee95847 ("cherry-pick: add --allow-empty-message option", 2012-08-02) > started doing this work, but it was never completed. For more discussion > on why this approach was chosen, see the thread beginning here: > > https://public-inbox.org/git/20120801111658.ga21...@arachsys.com/ > > https://stackoverflow.com/q/8542304 also shows this as a desirable > feature, and that the workaround is non-trivial to get right. > > --> Implementation > > Add a new --allow-empty-message flag. Propagate it to all calls of 'git > commit', 'git cherry-pick', and 'git rebase--helper' within the rebase > scripts. > > Signed-off-by: Genki Sky <s...@genki.is> > ---
Do you have our project history so that you can try running "git log" to realize that the above does not quite match how people write their log messages? If not, please obtain one and do so ;-) - We discourage log messages from not explaining what *it* needs to explain itself and only referring to external resources. The first part of the above is a typical anti-pattern. The only thing readers can gather from "Motivation" part without refering to outside resources is it is a moral follow-up of 4bee95847 whatever "this work" is doing, without being told what approach "this approach" means, etc. URLs are good as supporting info, but there must be something they are meant to support readable in the log message itself. - Also we do not organize our log messages as "-->" bulletted chapters. For this particular commit, once the first part becomes self-sufficient, I think it is sufficient to drop these bulletted headlines and have two paragraphs (first describing the problem being solved, then describing how the patch realizes that solution). I think the changes to the code are sensible. As Dscho said, I found the new test script somewhat iffy. Does it have to be a completely new test script (as opposed to an additional test or two to an existing tests for rebase that checks a similar feature like keep-empty)? Would it make it simpler to piggy back on an existing one?