Re: Why doesn't merge fail if message has only sign-off?

[Kaartic Sivaraam]

On Mon, 2017-07-03 at 10:21 -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> I think that it is not by design that it doesn't fail.  It's not
> like we decided to allow s-o-b only merge because we found a reason
> why it is a good idea to do so.
> 
> So I do not think anybody minds too deeply if somebody came up a
> patch to "fix" it.  It's just that nobody tried to create such a
> silly merge in real life so far (I do not think you did, either--you
> found this out by playing around trying to find corner cases, no?)
> 
Yes and no. I found this out while playing around with the "insert
notes in the commit template" patch I sent previously. I wasn't trying
to find corner cases, though.

-- 
Kaartic

Re: Why doesn't merge fail if message has only sign-off?

[Junio C Hamano]

Kaartic Sivaraam  writes:

> While trying to merge a branch using "git merge" if a merge
> message consists only of a "Sign-off" line it doesn't fail.
> To be consistent with the behaviour of "git commit" shouldn't the merge
> fail?

I think that it is not by design that it doesn't fail.  It's not
like we decided to allow s-o-b only merge because we found a reason
why it is a good idea to do so.

So I do not think anybody minds too deeply if somebody came up a
patch to "fix" it.  It's just that nobody tried to create such a
silly merge in real life so far (I do not think you did, either--you
found this out by playing around trying to find corner cases, no?)

Why doesn't merge fail if message has only sign-off?

[Kaartic Sivaraam]

While trying to merge a branch using "git merge" if a merge
message consists only of a "Sign-off" line it doesn't fail.
To be consistent with the behaviour of "git commit" shouldn't the merge
fail?

-- 
Kaartic