Thank you for your reply. Although I agree with everything you say, it
raised a few more questions.

On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 09:12:59AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Incorrect.  "git rebase" invokes "git am", not dot-sources it, so it
> does not propagate.

Then git am wouldn't be quite and this patch is doing wrong by removing
the -q argument from the git am invokation. Correct?

> I think it is irrelevant.  git-am uses many shell variables,
> e.g. HAS_HEAD, interactive, abort_safety, etc. but they are
> implementation details of the program and there is no point
> documenting it, and somebody rewriting it in C does not have to
> stick to the same name.


> There are a few used as implementation details, I think.  GIT_QUIET
> is not among them.

I made a mistake here thinking that git rebase set an enviromental
variable that git am later red. That would have been a way to
communicate, that the first processes that got the -q argument sets the
enviromental variabel GIT_QUIET and all other git invokations read that
enviromental variable.

I do not like that solution. When communicating between different git
commands I prefer, pipes, files and command line arguments. I think it
will be dangerous to include temporary enviromental variables (if we
don't stick to a few of them and document them very well).

In the case of passing information with temporary enviromental variables
it's no longer an implementation detail, but something a rewrite needs
to honor.

I hope I was able to make myself somewhat clear, and if I understand you
correctly we are already agreeing on this?

Med vänliga hälsningar
Fredrik Gustafsson

tel: 0733-608274
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at

Reply via email to