Make `git rebase -r`'s label generation more resilient #327

dscho · 2019-09-02T13:20:53Z

Those labels must be valid ref names, and therefore valid file names. The initial patch came in via Git for Windows.

Change since v1:

moved the entire sanitizing logic to label_oid(), as a preparatory step.

Cc: Doan Tran Cong Danh [email protected]

dscho · 2019-09-02T14:00:58Z

/submit

gitgitgadget · 2019-09-02T14:01:53Z

Submitted as [email protected]

dscho · 2019-09-02T14:12:26Z

(See also git-for-windows#2315)

sequencer.c

One of the trickier aspects of the design of `git rebase --rebase-merges` is the way labels are generated for the initial todo list: those labels are supposed to be intuitive and first and foremost unique. To that end, `label_oid()` appends a unique suffix when necessary. Those labels not only need to be unique, but they also need to be valid refs. To make sure of that, `make_script_with_merges()` replaces whitespace by dashes. That would appear to be the wrong layer for that sanitizing step, though: all callers of `label_oid()` should get that same benefit. Even if it does not make a difference currently (the only called of `label_oid()` that passes a label that might need to be sanitized _is_ `make_script_with_merges()`), let's move the responsibility for sanitizing labels into the `label_oid()` function. This commit is best viewed with `-w` because it unfortunately needs to change the indentation of a large block of code in `label_oid()`. Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <[email protected]>

The `label` todo command in interactive rebases creates temporary refs in the `refs/rewritten/` namespace. These refs are stored as loose refs, i.e. as files in `.git/refs/rewritten/`, therefore they have to conform with file name limitations on the current filesystem in addition to the accepted ref format. This poses a problem in particular on NTFS/FAT, where e.g. the colon, double-quote and pipe characters are disallowed as part of a file name. Let's safeguard against this by replacing not only white-space characters by dashes, but all non-alpha-numeric ones. However, we exempt non-ASCII UTF-8 characters from that, as it should be quite possible to reflect branch names such as `↯↯↯` in refs/file names. Signed-off-by: Matthew Rogers <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <[email protected]>

dscho · 2019-11-17T23:15:15Z

/submit

gitgitgadget · 2019-11-17T23:16:27Z

Submitted as [email protected]

gitgitgadget · 2019-11-18T03:46:46Z

On the Git mailing list, Junio C Hamano wrote (reply to this):

"Johannes Schindelin via GitGitGadget" <[email protected]>
writes:

> Those labels must be valid ref names, and therefore valid file names. The
> initial patch came in via Git for Windows.
>
> Change since v1:
>
>  * moved the entire sanitizing logic to label_oid(), as a preparatory step.
>
> Johannes Schindelin (1):
>   rebase-merges: move labels' whitespace mangling into `label_oid()`
>
> Matthew Rogers (1):
>   rebase -r: let `label` generate safer labels
>
>  sequencer.c              | 72 +++++++++++++++++++++++++---------------
>  t/t3430-rebase-merges.sh |  6 ++++
>  2 files changed, 51 insertions(+), 27 deletions(-)

I think Dscho meant to Cc you as these two patches are meant to be a
more complete solution to supersede your [*1*].


[Reference]

*1* <860dee65f49ea7eacf5a0c7c8ffe59095a51b1ce.1573205699.git.congdanhqx@gmail.com>

gitgitgadget · 2019-11-18T06:31:19Z

This branch is now known as js/rebase-r-safer-label.

gitgitgadget · 2019-11-18T06:31:20Z

This patch series was integrated into pu via git@9ac4901.

gitgitgadget · 2019-11-18T11:28:57Z

On the Git mailing list, Danh Doan wrote (reply to this):

On 2019-11-18 12:42:41+0900, Junio C Hamano <[email protected]> wrote:
> "Johannes Schindelin via GitGitGadget" <[email protected]>
> writes:
> 
> > Those labels must be valid ref names, and therefore valid file names. The
> > initial patch came in via Git for Windows.
> >
> > Change since v1:
> >
> >  * moved the entire sanitizing logic to label_oid(), as a preparatory step.
> >
> > Johannes Schindelin (1):
> >   rebase-merges: move labels' whitespace mangling into `label_oid()`
> >
> > Matthew Rogers (1):
> >   rebase -r: let `label` generate safer labels
> >
> >  sequencer.c              | 72 +++++++++++++++++++++++++---------------
> >  t/t3430-rebase-merges.sh |  6 ++++
> >  2 files changed, 51 insertions(+), 27 deletions(-)
> 
> I think Dscho meant to Cc you as these two patches are meant to be a
> more complete solution to supersede your [*1*].

I've applied their patches over my branches,
my introduced test_expect_failure was flipped.
That's nice.

Anyway, when reading their patch, I discovered a problem with
git rebase --rebase-merges when its message is onto.

Here is a patch to fix it.

I applied Dscho's patches over my dd/sequencer-utf8 then writing this
patch, in case you have problem applying it.

The context for the diff is coming from Dscho's patches.

-------8<--------------------
From 48205889b404b82baa4b30c2eedd52243c349e3e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Doan Tran Cong Danh <[email protected]>
Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2019 18:02:05 +0700
Subject: [PATCH] sequencer: handle rebase-merge for "onto" message

In order to work correctly, git-rebase --rebase-merges needs to make
initial todo list with unique labels.

Those unique labels is being handled by employing a hashmap and
suffixing an unique number if any duplicate is found.

But we forgat that beside of those labels for side branches,
we also make a special label `onto' for our so-called new-base.

In a special case that any of those labels for side branches named
`onto', git will run into trouble.

Correct it.

Signed-off-by: Doan Tran Cong Danh <[email protected]>
---
 sequencer.c              |  5 +++++
 t/t3430-rebase-merges.sh | 21 +++++++++++++++++++++
 2 files changed, 26 insertions(+)

diff --git a/sequencer.c b/sequencer.c
index 350045b1b4..fc81e43f0f 100644
--- a/sequencer.c
+++ b/sequencer.c
@@ -4569,10 +4569,15 @@ static int make_script_with_merges(struct pretty_print_context *pp,
 	strbuf_init(&state.buf, 32);
 
 	if (revs->cmdline.nr && (revs->cmdline.rev[0].flags & BOTTOM)) {
+		struct labels_entry *onto_label_entry;
 		struct object_id *oid = &revs->cmdline.rev[0].item->oid;
 		FLEX_ALLOC_STR(entry, string, "onto");
 		oidcpy(&entry->entry.oid, oid);
 		oidmap_put(&state.commit2label, entry);
+
+		FLEX_ALLOC_STR(onto_label_entry, label, "onto");
+		hashmap_entry_init(&onto_label_entry->entry, strihash("onto"));
+		hashmap_add(&state.labels, &onto_label_entry->entry);
 	}
 
 	/*
diff --git a/t/t3430-rebase-merges.sh b/t/t3430-rebase-merges.sh
index f728aba995..4e2c0ede51 100755
--- a/t/t3430-rebase-merges.sh
+++ b/t/t3430-rebase-merges.sh
@@ -474,4 +474,25 @@ test_expect_success '--rebase-merges with commit that can generate bad character
 	git rebase --rebase-merges --force-rebase E
 '
 
+test_expect_success '--rebase-merges with message matched with onto label' '
+	git checkout -b onto-label E &&
+	git merge -m onto G &&
+	git rebase --rebase-merges --force-rebase E &&
+	test_cmp_graph <<-\EOF
+	*   onto
+	|\
+	| * G
+	| * F
+	* |   E
+	|\ \
+	| * | B
+	* | | D
+	| |/
+	|/|
+	* | C
+	|/
+	* A
+	EOF
+'
+
 test_done
-- 
2.24.0.10.gc61c3b979f.dirty

gitgitgadget · 2019-11-18T12:01:55Z

On the Git mailing list, Doan Tran Cong Danh wrote (reply to this):

In order to work correctly, git-rebase --rebase-merges needs to make
initial todo list with unique labels.

Those unique labels is being handled by employing a hashmap and
appending an unique number if any duplicate is found.

But, we forget that beside those labels for side branches,
we also have a special label `onto' for our so-called new-base.

In a special case that any of those labels for side branches named
`onto', git will run into trouble.

Correct it.

Signed-off-by: Doan Tran Cong Danh <[email protected]>
---
Sorry for the noise, I forgot to check spelling for v1

And I forgot to delete From line when append to my MUA.

Range-diff against v1:
1:  48205889b4 ! 1:  9246beacf2 sequencer: handle rebase-merge for "onto" message
    @@ Metadata
     Author: Doan Tran Cong Danh <[email protected]>
     
      ## Commit message ##
    -    sequencer: handle rebase-merge for "onto" message
    +    sequencer: handle rebase-merges for "onto" message
     
         In order to work correctly, git-rebase --rebase-merges needs to make
         initial todo list with unique labels.
     
         Those unique labels is being handled by employing a hashmap and
    -    suffixing an unique number if any duplicate is found.
    +    appending an unique number if any duplicate is found.
     
    -    But we forgat that beside of those labels for side branches,
    -    we also make a special label `onto' for our so-called new-base.
    +    But, we forget that beside those labels for side branches,
    +    we also have a special label `onto' for our so-called new-base.
     
         In a special case that any of those labels for side branches named
         `onto', git will run into trouble.

 sequencer.c              |  5 +++++
 t/t3430-rebase-merges.sh | 21 +++++++++++++++++++++
 2 files changed, 26 insertions(+)

diff --git a/sequencer.c b/sequencer.c
index 350045b1b4..fc81e43f0f 100644
--- a/sequencer.c
+++ b/sequencer.c
@@ -4569,10 +4569,15 @@ static int make_script_with_merges(struct pretty_print_context *pp,
 	strbuf_init(&state.buf, 32);
 
 	if (revs->cmdline.nr && (revs->cmdline.rev[0].flags & BOTTOM)) {
+		struct labels_entry *onto_label_entry;
 		struct object_id *oid = &revs->cmdline.rev[0].item->oid;
 		FLEX_ALLOC_STR(entry, string, "onto");
 		oidcpy(&entry->entry.oid, oid);
 		oidmap_put(&state.commit2label, entry);
+
+		FLEX_ALLOC_STR(onto_label_entry, label, "onto");
+		hashmap_entry_init(&onto_label_entry->entry, strihash("onto"));
+		hashmap_add(&state.labels, &onto_label_entry->entry);
 	}
 
 	/*
diff --git a/t/t3430-rebase-merges.sh b/t/t3430-rebase-merges.sh
index f728aba995..4e2c0ede51 100755
--- a/t/t3430-rebase-merges.sh
+++ b/t/t3430-rebase-merges.sh
@@ -474,4 +474,25 @@ test_expect_success '--rebase-merges with commit that can generate bad character
 	git rebase --rebase-merges --force-rebase E
 '
 
+test_expect_success '--rebase-merges with message matched with onto label' '
+	git checkout -b onto-label E &&
+	git merge -m onto G &&
+	git rebase --rebase-merges --force-rebase E &&
+	test_cmp_graph <<-\EOF
+	*   onto
+	|\
+	| * G
+	| * F
+	* |   E
+	|\ \
+	| * | B
+	* | | D
+	| |/
+	|/|
+	* | C
+	|/
+	* A
+	EOF
+'
+
 test_done
-- 
2.24.0.10.gc61c3b979f.dirty

gitgitgadget · 2019-11-18T20:20:12Z

On the Git mailing list, Johannes Schindelin wrote (reply to this):

Hi,

On Mon, 18 Nov 2019, Doan Tran Cong Danh wrote:

> In order to work correctly, git-rebase --rebase-merges needs to make
> initial todo list with unique labels.
>
> Those unique labels is being handled by employing a hashmap and
> appending an unique number if any duplicate is found.
>
> But, we forget that beside those labels for side branches,
> we also have a special label `onto' for our so-called new-base.
>
> In a special case that any of those labels for side branches named
> `onto', git will run into trouble.
>
> Correct it.
>
> Signed-off-by: Doan Tran Cong Danh <[email protected]>
> ---

Looks obviously correct to me. ACK!

Thank you,
Dscho

> Sorry for the noise, I forgot to check spelling for v1
>
> And I forgot to delete From line when append to my MUA.
>
> Range-diff against v1:
> 1:  48205889b4 ! 1:  9246beacf2 sequencer: handle rebase-merge for "onto=
" message
>     @@ Metadata
>      Author: Doan Tran Cong Danh <[email protected]>
>
>       ## Commit message ##
>     -    sequencer: handle rebase-merge for "onto" message
>     +    sequencer: handle rebase-merges for "onto" message
>
>          In order to work correctly, git-rebase --rebase-merges needs to=
 make
>          initial todo list with unique labels.
>
>          Those unique labels is being handled by employing a hashmap and
>     -    suffixing an unique number if any duplicate is found.
>     +    appending an unique number if any duplicate is found.
>
>     -    But we forgat that beside of those labels for side branches,
>     -    we also make a special label `onto' for our so-called new-base.
>     +    But, we forget that beside those labels for side branches,
>     +    we also have a special label `onto' for our so-called new-base.
>
>          In a special case that any of those labels for side branches na=
med
>          `onto', git will run into trouble.
>
>  sequencer.c              |  5 +++++
>  t/t3430-rebase-merges.sh | 21 +++++++++++++++++++++
>  2 files changed, 26 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/sequencer.c b/sequencer.c
> index 350045b1b4..fc81e43f0f 100644
> --- a/sequencer.c
> +++ b/sequencer.c
> @@ -4569,10 +4569,15 @@ static int make_script_with_merges(struct pretty=
_print_context *pp,
>  	strbuf_init(&state.buf, 32);
>
>  	if (revs->cmdline.nr && (revs->cmdline.rev[0].flags & BOTTOM)) {
> +		struct labels_entry *onto_label_entry;
>  		struct object_id *oid =3D &revs->cmdline.rev[0].item->oid;
>  		FLEX_ALLOC_STR(entry, string, "onto");
>  		oidcpy(&entry->entry.oid, oid);
>  		oidmap_put(&state.commit2label, entry);
> +
> +		FLEX_ALLOC_STR(onto_label_entry, label, "onto");
> +		hashmap_entry_init(&onto_label_entry->entry, strihash("onto"));
> +		hashmap_add(&state.labels, &onto_label_entry->entry);
>  	}
>
>  	/*
> diff --git a/t/t3430-rebase-merges.sh b/t/t3430-rebase-merges.sh
> index f728aba995..4e2c0ede51 100755
> --- a/t/t3430-rebase-merges.sh
> +++ b/t/t3430-rebase-merges.sh
> @@ -474,4 +474,25 @@ test_expect_success '--rebase-merges with commit th=
at can generate bad character
>  	git rebase --rebase-merges --force-rebase E
>  '
>
> +test_expect_success '--rebase-merges with message matched with onto lab=
el' '
> +	git checkout -b onto-label E &&
> +	git merge -m onto G &&
> +	git rebase --rebase-merges --force-rebase E &&
> +	test_cmp_graph <<-\EOF
> +	*   onto
> +	|\
> +	| * G
> +	| * F
> +	* |   E
> +	|\ \
> +	| * | B
> +	* | | D
> +	| |/
> +	|/|
> +	* | C
> +	|/
> +	* A
> +	EOF
> +'
> +
>  test_done
> --
> 2.24.0.10.gc61c3b979f.dirty
>
>

gitgitgadget · 2019-11-18T20:56:18Z

On the Git mailing list, Johannes Schindelin wrote (reply to this):

Hi Junio,

On Mon, 18 Nov 2019, Junio C Hamano wrote:

> "Johannes Schindelin via GitGitGadget" <[email protected]>
> writes:
>
> > Those labels must be valid ref names, and therefore valid file names. =
The
> > initial patch came in via Git for Windows.
> >
> > Change since v1:
> >
> >  * moved the entire sanitizing logic to label_oid(), as a preparatory =
step.
> >
> > Johannes Schindelin (1):
> >   rebase-merges: move labels' whitespace mangling into `label_oid()`
> >
> > Matthew Rogers (1):
> >   rebase -r: let `label` generate safer labels
> >
> >  sequencer.c              | 72 +++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------=
-
> >  t/t3430-rebase-merges.sh |  6 ++++
> >  2 files changed, 51 insertions(+), 27 deletions(-)
>
> I think Dscho meant to Cc you as these two patches are meant to be a
> more complete solution to supersede your [*1*].

Whoops, totally forgot. Thanks!
Dscho

>
>
> [Reference]
>
> *1* <860dee65f49ea7eacf5a0c7c8ffe59095a51b1ce.1573205699.git.congdanhqx@=
gmail.com>
>

gitgitgadget · 2019-11-19T05:21:00Z

This patch series was integrated into pu via git@da8e83b.

gitgitgadget · 2019-11-19T07:12:07Z

This patch series was integrated into pu via git@eff2a14.

gitgitgadget · 2019-11-20T05:50:45Z

This patch series was integrated into pu via git@3ff83f1.

gitgitgadget · 2019-11-20T12:00:16Z

This patch series was integrated into pu via git@bb7e150.

gitgitgadget · 2019-11-21T00:22:18Z

On the Git mailing list, Junio C Hamano wrote (reply to this):

Danh Doan <[email protected]> writes:

> Anyway, when reading their patch, I discovered a problem with
> git rebase --rebase-merges when its message is onto.
>
> Here is a patch to fix it.
>
> I applied Dscho's patches over my dd/sequencer-utf8 then writing this
> patch, in case you have problem applying it.
>
> The context for the diff is coming from Dscho's patches.

Thanks.  While technically this is independent from the "safer
rebase-merges labels" topic (specifically its preparation step),
in the larger picture, this too is to ensure we do not use a wrong
string as a label ;-), so I'll queue it on top of those two patches,
just like how you developed.

Thanks.

> -------8<--------------------
> From 48205889b404b82baa4b30c2eedd52243c349e3e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Doan Tran Cong Danh <[email protected]>
> Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2019 18:02:05 +0700
> Subject: [PATCH] sequencer: handle rebase-merge for "onto" message
>
> In order to work correctly, git-rebase --rebase-merges needs to make
> initial todo list with unique labels.
>
> Those unique labels is being handled by employing a hashmap and
> suffixing an unique number if any duplicate is found.
>
> But we forgat that beside of those labels for side branches,
> we also make a special label `onto' for our so-called new-base.
>
> In a special case that any of those labels for side branches named
> `onto', git will run into trouble.
>
> Correct it.
>
> Signed-off-by: Doan Tran Cong Danh <[email protected]>
> ---
>  sequencer.c              |  5 +++++
>  t/t3430-rebase-merges.sh | 21 +++++++++++++++++++++
>  2 files changed, 26 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/sequencer.c b/sequencer.c
> index 350045b1b4..fc81e43f0f 100644
> --- a/sequencer.c
> +++ b/sequencer.c
> @@ -4569,10 +4569,15 @@ static int make_script_with_merges(struct pretty_print_context *pp,
>  	strbuf_init(&state.buf, 32);
>  
>  	if (revs->cmdline.nr && (revs->cmdline.rev[0].flags & BOTTOM)) {
> +		struct labels_entry *onto_label_entry;
>  		struct object_id *oid = &revs->cmdline.rev[0].item->oid;
>  		FLEX_ALLOC_STR(entry, string, "onto");
>  		oidcpy(&entry->entry.oid, oid);
>  		oidmap_put(&state.commit2label, entry);
> +
> +		FLEX_ALLOC_STR(onto_label_entry, label, "onto");
> +		hashmap_entry_init(&onto_label_entry->entry, strihash("onto"));
> +		hashmap_add(&state.labels, &onto_label_entry->entry);
>  	}
>  
>  	/*
> diff --git a/t/t3430-rebase-merges.sh b/t/t3430-rebase-merges.sh
> index f728aba995..4e2c0ede51 100755
> --- a/t/t3430-rebase-merges.sh
> +++ b/t/t3430-rebase-merges.sh
> @@ -474,4 +474,25 @@ test_expect_success '--rebase-merges with commit that can generate bad character
>  	git rebase --rebase-merges --force-rebase E
>  '
>  
> +test_expect_success '--rebase-merges with message matched with onto label' '
> +	git checkout -b onto-label E &&
> +	git merge -m onto G &&
> +	git rebase --rebase-merges --force-rebase E &&
> +	test_cmp_graph <<-\EOF
> +	*   onto
> +	|\
> +	| * G
> +	| * F
> +	* |   E
> +	|\ \
> +	| * | B
> +	* | | D
> +	| |/
> +	|/|
> +	* | C
> +	|/
> +	* A
> +	EOF
> +'
> +
>  test_done

gitgitgadget · 2019-11-21T04:56:35Z

This patch series was integrated into pu via git@107077a.

gitgitgadget · 2019-11-21T07:41:26Z

This patch series was integrated into pu via git@94b3cc1.

gitgitgadget · 2019-11-21T07:41:27Z

This patch series was integrated into next via git@791d51b.

gitgitgadget · 2019-11-22T08:35:53Z

This patch series was integrated into pu via git@089c065.

gitgitgadget · 2019-11-25T08:54:54Z

This patch series was integrated into pu via git@81c0274.

gitgitgadget · 2019-11-27T10:12:27Z

This patch series was integrated into pu via git@cee86dc.

gitgitgadget · 2019-12-02T16:15:29Z

This patch series was integrated into pu via git@8c396f1.

gitgitgadget · 2019-12-03T01:13:13Z

This patch series was integrated into pu via git@f65c70b.

gitgitgadget · 2019-12-05T22:42:16Z

This patch series was integrated into pu via git@917d0d6.

gitgitgadget · 2019-12-05T22:42:17Z

This patch series was integrated into next via git@917d0d6.

gitgitgadget · 2019-12-05T22:42:18Z

This patch series was integrated into master via git@917d0d6.

gitgitgadget · 2019-12-05T22:42:21Z

Closed via 917d0d6.

gitgitgadget bot reviewed Sep 2, 2019

View reviewed changes

sequencer.c Show resolved Hide resolved

weekly-digest bot mentioned this pull request Sep 8, 2019

Weekly Digest (1 September, 2019 - 8 September, 2019) #336

Closed

dscho added the needs-work These patches have pending issues that need to be resolved before submitting label Sep 11, 2019

weekly-digest bot mentioned this pull request Sep 15, 2019

Weekly Digest (8 September, 2019 - 15 September, 2019) #338

Closed

dscho and others added 2 commits November 17, 2019 22:53

dscho removed the needs-work These patches have pending issues that need to be resolved before submitting label Nov 17, 2019

dscho force-pushed the fix-rebase-r-labels branch from 4a02c38 to adc22c8 Compare November 17, 2019 21:57

gitgitgadget bot added the pu label Nov 18, 2019

gitgitgadget bot added the next label Nov 21, 2019

gitgitgadget bot added the master label Dec 5, 2019

gitgitgadget bot closed this Dec 5, 2019

dscho deleted the fix-rebase-r-labels branch December 8, 2019 11:12

dscho mentioned this pull request Dec 11, 2019

Update ROGERSM94/fix-rebase to the version that made it upstream git-for-windows/git#2428

Merged

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Make `git rebase -r`'s label generation more resilient #327

Make `git rebase -r`'s label generation more resilient #327

dscho commented Sep 2, 2019 •

edited

Loading

dscho commented Sep 2, 2019

gitgitgadget bot commented Sep 2, 2019

dscho commented Sep 2, 2019

dscho commented Nov 17, 2019

gitgitgadget bot commented Nov 17, 2019

gitgitgadget bot commented Nov 18, 2019

gitgitgadget bot commented Nov 18, 2019

gitgitgadget bot commented Nov 18, 2019

gitgitgadget bot commented Nov 18, 2019

gitgitgadget bot commented Nov 18, 2019

gitgitgadget bot commented Nov 18, 2019

gitgitgadget bot commented Nov 18, 2019

gitgitgadget bot commented Nov 19, 2019

gitgitgadget bot commented Nov 19, 2019

gitgitgadget bot commented Nov 20, 2019

gitgitgadget bot commented Nov 20, 2019

gitgitgadget bot commented Nov 21, 2019

gitgitgadget bot commented Nov 21, 2019

gitgitgadget bot commented Nov 21, 2019

gitgitgadget bot commented Nov 21, 2019

gitgitgadget bot commented Nov 22, 2019

gitgitgadget bot commented Nov 25, 2019

gitgitgadget bot commented Nov 27, 2019

gitgitgadget bot commented Dec 2, 2019

gitgitgadget bot commented Dec 3, 2019

gitgitgadget bot commented Dec 5, 2019

gitgitgadget bot commented Dec 5, 2019

gitgitgadget bot commented Dec 5, 2019

gitgitgadget bot commented Dec 5, 2019

Make git rebase -r's label generation more resilient #327

Make git rebase -r's label generation more resilient #327

Conversation

dscho commented Sep 2, 2019 • edited Loading

dscho commented Sep 2, 2019

gitgitgadget bot commented Sep 2, 2019

dscho commented Sep 2, 2019

dscho commented Nov 17, 2019

gitgitgadget bot commented Nov 17, 2019

gitgitgadget bot commented Nov 18, 2019

gitgitgadget bot commented Nov 18, 2019

gitgitgadget bot commented Nov 18, 2019

gitgitgadget bot commented Nov 18, 2019

gitgitgadget bot commented Nov 18, 2019

gitgitgadget bot commented Nov 18, 2019

gitgitgadget bot commented Nov 18, 2019

gitgitgadget bot commented Nov 19, 2019

gitgitgadget bot commented Nov 19, 2019

gitgitgadget bot commented Nov 20, 2019

gitgitgadget bot commented Nov 20, 2019

gitgitgadget bot commented Nov 21, 2019

gitgitgadget bot commented Nov 21, 2019

gitgitgadget bot commented Nov 21, 2019

gitgitgadget bot commented Nov 21, 2019

gitgitgadget bot commented Nov 22, 2019

gitgitgadget bot commented Nov 25, 2019

gitgitgadget bot commented Nov 27, 2019

gitgitgadget bot commented Dec 2, 2019

gitgitgadget bot commented Dec 3, 2019

gitgitgadget bot commented Dec 5, 2019

gitgitgadget bot commented Dec 5, 2019

gitgitgadget bot commented Dec 5, 2019

gitgitgadget bot commented Dec 5, 2019

Make `git rebase -r`'s label generation more resilient #327

Make `git rebase -r`'s label generation more resilient #327

dscho commented Sep 2, 2019 •

edited

Loading