Michael J Gruber writes:
> Without any config being set the result is certainly what I'm after.
>
> What I'm still wondering about is the case without --edit but with
> commit.cleanup: It seems to me that "git commit" being involved in a
> conflict-less cherry-pick is solely an implemention detai
Junio C Hamano venit, vidit, dixit 26.02.2015 20:49:
> Michael J Gruber writes:
>
>> Hmm. With "--edit", current config being in effect should be expected,
>> right? So how about:
>>
>> In case of no conflict: force cleanup=verbatim unless --edit is used?
>
> Perhaps something like that.
>
> St
Michael J Gruber writes:
> Hmm. With "--edit", current config being in effect should be expected,
> right? So how about:
>
> In case of no conflict: force cleanup=verbatim unless --edit is used?
Perhaps something like that.
Stepping back a bit and imagine a world where the sole purpose of
cherr
Junio C Hamano venit, vidit, dixit 25.02.2015 19:22:
> Michael J Gruber writes:
>
>> Junio C Hamano venit, vidit, dixit 24.02.2015 19:29:
>>> Michael J Gruber writes:
>>>
> Hmm, wouldn't it introduce a grave regression for users who
> explicitly ask to clean crufty messages up (by settin
Michael J Gruber writes:
> Junio C Hamano venit, vidit, dixit 24.02.2015 19:29:
>> Michael J Gruber writes:
>>
Hmm, wouldn't it introduce a grave regression for users who
explicitly ask to clean crufty messages up (by setting their own
commit.cleanup configuration) if you uncondi
On Tue, 2015-02-24 at 10:29 -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Hmm, but if it does not, wouldn't that countermand the wish of the
> user who explicitly asked to clean crufty messages up by setting
> their own commit.cleanup configuration?
IMHO it's just wrong behaviour if the commit messages of peopl
Junio C Hamano venit, vidit, dixit 24.02.2015 19:29:
> Michael J Gruber writes:
>
>>> Hmm, wouldn't it introduce a grave regression for users who
>>> explicitly ask to clean crufty messages up (by setting their own
>>> commit.cleanup configuration) if you unconditionally force
>>> "--cleanup=verb
Michael J Gruber writes:
>> Hmm, wouldn't it introduce a grave regression for users who
>> explicitly ask to clean crufty messages up (by setting their own
>> commit.cleanup configuration) if you unconditionally force
>> "--cleanup=verbatim" here?
>>
>
> That's what I meant by possible side-effe
Junio C Hamano venit, vidit, dixit 23.02.2015 19:54:
> Michael J Gruber writes:
>
>> sequencer calls "commit" with default options, which implies
>> "--cleanup=default" unless the user specified something else in their
>> config. This leads to cherry-picked commits getting a cleaned up commit
>>
Michael J Gruber writes:
> sequencer calls "commit" with default options, which implies
> "--cleanup=default" unless the user specified something else in their
> config. This leads to cherry-picked commits getting a cleaned up commit
> message, which is usually not an intended side-effect.
>
> Ma
sequencer calls "commit" with default options, which implies
"--cleanup=default" unless the user specified something else in their
config. This leads to cherry-picked commits getting a cleaned up commit
message, which is usually not an intended side-effect.
Make the sequencer use "--cleanup=verbat
11 matches
Mail list logo
