Junio C Hamano wrote:
>  wt-status.c | 6 +++++-
>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> diff --git a/wt-status.c b/wt-status.c
> index bf84a86..403d48d 100644
> --- a/wt-status.c
> +++ b/wt-status.c
> @@ -1176,7 +1176,11 @@ void wt_status_print(struct wt_status *s)
>                         branch_name += 11;
>                 else if (!strcmp(branch_name, "HEAD")) {
>                         branch_status_color = color(WT_STATUS_NOBRANCH, s);
> -                       if (state.detached_from) {
> +
> +                       if (state.rebase_in_progress) {
> +                               on_what = _("HEAD detached at ");
> +                               branch_name = state.onto;
> +                       } else if (state.detached_from) {
>                                 unsigned char sha1[20];
>                                 branch_name = state.detached_from;

Good.  You have proposed a solution to the problem.  However, it is
wrong for the following reasons:

1. It shows a pseudo "HEAD detached at" message.  Everywhere else,
when the user sees a "HEAD detached at $committish" message, git
rev-parse $committish = git rev-parse HEAD.  A rebase-in-progress
seems to be the only exception, and the user has no idea this is

2. The following no longer updates status:

  # in the middle of a rebase
  $ git reset @~2

The constant "HEAD detached at $onto" message is misleading and Bad.
Besides, wasn't this the primary usecase you wanted?

You previously wrote:
> *1* One thing I could think of is to start sightseeing or (more
>     realistically) manually bisecting at a given release point,
>     reset the detached HEAD around several times, and then want to
>     be reminded where the session started from.  I do not think it
>     is particularly a very good example, though.

Whether the HEAD is detached by bisect or rebase is irrelevant.

3. The problem is not unique to rebase at all; yet you have
special-cased it.  If this isn't a band-aid, what is?  The larger
problem, as I have stated previously, is that 'git status' output
depends on the _implementations_ of various commands (do they write a
"checkout: " message to the reflog or not?).  Therefore, a future
contributor who updates a command to write more sensible reflog
messages will have to apply a similar band-aid.

If you want to take the band-aid approach, I think this is the right
way to do it:

diff --git a/wt-status.c b/wt-status.c
index bf84a86..99c55e3 100644
--- a/wt-status.c
+++ b/wt-status.c
@@ -1182,7 +1182,7 @@ void wt_status_print(struct wt_status *s)
                                if (!get_sha1("HEAD", sha1) &&
                                    !hashcmp(sha1, state.detached_sha1))
                                        on_what = _("HEAD detached at ");
-                               else
+                               else if (!state.rebase_in_progress)
                                        on_what = _("HEAD detached from ");
                        } else {
                                branch_name = "";

You have already mentioned that there is a topic cooking to improve
this first-line in the case of rebase, so this regression from a
senseless message isn't a problem.

The problem with this bad-aid, as with all band aids, is that this
will soon explode to become else if(!state.rebase_in_progress &&
!state.bisect_in_progress && ....) when people update those scripts.
If you don't want to go with the band-aid, I have no choice but to
smudge the first-line.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to