This allows git-cherry-pick and git-revert to properly identify
themselves in the resulting reflog entries. Earlier they were
recorded as what git-commit has done.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Always call the current HEAD 'HEAD', and name the patch being
cherry-picked or reverted by its oneline subject rather than
its SHA1. This matches git am's behavior and is done because
users most commonly are cherry-picking by SHA1 rather than by
ref name.
Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
This makes revert and cherry-pick to use merge-recursive, to
allow them to notice renames. A pair of test scripts
demonstrate that an old change before a rename happened can be
applied (reverted) after a rename with cherry-pick (with revert).
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
The following commands can reuse log message from an existing
commit while creating a new commit:
git-cherry-pick
git-rebase (both with and without --merge)
git-commit (-c and -C)
When the original commit was made in a different encoding from
the current i18n.commitencoding, "cat-file commit" would give a
string that is inconsistent with what the resulting commit will
claim to be in. Replace them with "git show -s --encoding".
"git-rebase" without --merge is "git format-patch" piped to "git
am" in essence, and has been taken care of before this commit.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
This updates five commands (merge, pull, rebase, revert and cherry-pick)
so that they can be started from a subdirectory.
This may not actually be what we want to do. These commands are
inherently whole-tree operations, and an inexperienced user may
mistakenly expect a "git pull" from a subdirectory would merge
only the subdirectory the command started from.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
The code previously checked it's own name and called 'die' upon
an error. However 'die' was not yet defined because git-sh-setup
had not been sourced yet. Instead simply write the error message
to stderr and exit with an error as was originally desired.
Signed-off-by: Bob Proulx <bob@proulx.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
If the user tries to run a porcelainish command which requires
a working directory in a bare repository they may get unexpected
results which are difficult to predict and may differ from command
to command.
Instead we should detect that the current repository is a bare
repository and refuse to run the command there, as there is no
working directory associated with it.
[jc: updated Shawn's original somewhat -- bugs are mine.]
Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Now that we have decided to make 'add' behave like 'update-index'
(and therefore fully classify update-index as strictly plumbing)
the am/revert/cherry-pick family of commands should not steer the
user towards update-index. Instead send them to the command they
probably already know, 'add'.
Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
In a busy project, reverting a commit almost always results
in a conflict between one or more files (depending on the
commit being reverted). It is useful to record this
conflict in the commit-to-be message of the resulting commit
(after the resolve). The process now becomes:
git-revert <SHA-1>
<git complains and prints failed automatic>
<user manually resolves>
git-update-index <resolved files>
git-commit -s
And the commit message is now a merge of the revert commit
message and the conflict commit message, giving the user a
chance to edit it or add more information:
Signed-off-by: Luben Tuikov <ltuikov@yahoo.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Defaulting to $replay for the sake of fixing cherry-pick was not
done conditionally, which broke git-revert.
Noticed by Luben.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
And introduce -x to expose (possibly) private commit object name
for people who cherry-pick between public branches.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
We always talk about "commit xyz".
We never talk about "xyz commit", except when we end up talking
about a commit as a branch head (notably, I would say "the HEAD
commit", or possibly "the top-of-master commit", but here
$commit is a SHA1 name, not anything else).
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
After doing an in-index 3-way merge, we always do the stock
"merge-index merge-one-file" without doing anything fancy;
use of --aggressive helps performance quite a bit.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
It said "after fixing up, commit the result using -F .msg", but
it was not clear for new people how "fix up" should be done.
Hint "git-update-index <path>".
We could recommend "git commit -a -F .msg" instead, but I am
hesitant to give that suggestion in the blind -- you could do a
cherry-pick, revert or a merge in general in a dirty working
tree as long as local modifications do not overlap with the
merge, but using "commit -a" would include them in the result.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
* Added the -e option to the documentation of git-cherry-pick.
* Added the -e and --no-commit option to git-revert.
* Removed redundant case expression for -n as --no-edit (already taken by
--no-commit).
Signed-off-by: Nikolai Weibull <nikolai@bitwi.se>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
This switch was not documented properly. I decided not to mention
the --no-edit switch in the git-cherry-pick documentation since
we always default to no editing.
Signed-off-by: Petr Baudis <pasky@suse.cz>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Now all the users of this script detect its exit status and die,
complaining that it is outside git repository. So move the code
that dies from all callers to git-sh-setup script.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Revert always should explain why, so make --edit the default,
unless stdin is not a terminal. If you really don't want to say
anything, you can say "git-revert --no-edit $commit", or if you
are really sick, you could also say "git-revert $commit </dev/null".
But please don't.
You can also say "git-cherry-pick --edit $commit". Not editting
the commit log message is the default for cherry-pick.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
I think all commit operations should allow editing of the message (ie we
should do this for merges too), but that's _particularly_ true of doing a
"git revert".
We should always explain why we needed to revert something.
This patch adds a "-e" or "--edit" flag to "git revert", although I
actually suspect it should be on by default (and we should have a
"--no-edit" flag to disable it, probably together with an automatic
disable if stdin isn't a terminal).
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
I noticed format-patch loses authorship information of Lukas' patch
when I run git tools with LC_LANG set to ja_JP. It turns out that
the sed script to set environment variables were not working on his
name (encoded in UTF-8), which is unfortunate but technically correct.
Force sed invocation under C locale because we always want literal byte
semantics.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
My stupidity deserved to be yelled at by Linus ... there is no reason
to require the working tree to be clean when merging -- the only
requirements are index to match HEAD commit and the paths involved in
merge are up to date in the working tree. Revert and cherry-pick are
just specialized forms of merge, and the requirements should be the
same.
Remove the 'general purpose routine to make sure tree is clean' from
git-sh-setup, to prevent me from getting tempted again.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
As promised, this is the "big tool rename" patch. The primary differences
since 0.99.6 are:
(1) git-*-script are no more. The commands installed do not
have any such suffix so users do not have to remember if
something is implemented as a shell script or not.
(2) Many command names with 'cache' in them are renamed with
'index' if that is what they mean.
There are backward compatibility symblic links so that you and
Porcelains can keep using the old names, but the backward
compatibility support is expected to be removed in the near
future.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
The original committer may have used validation criteria that is less
stricter than yours. You do not want to lose the changes even if they
are done in substandard way from your 'commit -v' verifier's point of
view.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
The reverse patch application using "git apply" sometimes is too
rigid. Since the user would get used to resolving conflicting merges
by hand during the normal merge experience, using the same machinery
would be more helpful rather than just giving up.
Cherry-picking and reverting are essentially the same operation.
You pick one commit, and apply the difference that commit introduces
to its own commit ancestry chain to the current tree. Revert applies
the diff in reverse while cherry-pick applies it forward. They share
the same logic, just different messages and merge direction.
Rewrite "git rebase" using "git cherry-pick".
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Given one existing commit, revert the change the patch
introduces, and record a new commit that records it. This
requires your working tree to be clean (no modifications from
the HEAD commit).
This is based on what Linus posted to the list, with
enhancements he suggested, including the use of -M to attempt
reverting renames.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Junio C Hamano