GNU bug report logs - #64055
31.0.50; log-view-modify-change-comment support for Git and Hg

Previous Next

Package: emacs;

Reported by: Morgan Smith <Morgan.J.Smith <at> outlook.com>

Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2023 23:05:02 UTC

Severity: normal

Tags: patch

Found in version 27.0.50

Full log


Message #229 received at 64055 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Sean Whitton <spwhitton <at> spwhitton.name>
To: Dmitry Gutov <dgutov <at> yandex.ru>
Cc: Morgan.J.Smith <at> outlook.com, Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>,
 64055 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#64055: Implementation of modifying VC change comments for Git
Date: Sun, 27 Oct 2024 10:25:21 +0800
Hello,

On Sun 27 Oct 2024 at 03:05am +02, Dmitry Gutov wrote:

> On 26/10/2024 06:12, Sean Whitton wrote:
>>> Maybe we can rephrase it like this:
>>>
>>>   Some VCS commands can change your copy of published change history
>>>   without warning.  In VC we try to detect before that happens, and stop.
>>>   You can customize this variable to permit rewriting history
>>>   even though Emacs thinks it is dangerous.
>>>
>>>   So far, this applies only to using 'e' from Log View mode for Git.
>> Whether or not there is a strict mismatch, I like your new text more.
>> Please install it.
>>
>>> BTW, there is another existing command which can end up changing
>>> published history: 'vc-git-log-edit-toggle-amend'. I wonder what will
>>> be our plan for it. Maybe we just add the same check there.
>> Thanks for reminding me about this.  Yes, I think it should be fine to
>> just add (vc-git--assert-allowed-rewrite "HEAD") or similar.  Would you
>> like to do it along with your NEWS change?  I guess, then, dropping the
>> "So far ..." sentence.
>
> Great! Pushed in 2030b8c7f24.

Thanks.

> Speaking of the description in NEWS, completion just reminded me that
> we also have vc-hg-log-edit-toggle-amend, maybe we could also do
> something about it.

Yes, would be good to.

> I also got to thinking about the older VCSes supporting
> 'modify-change-comment'. OT1H it also modifies "published history" in those
> instances. OT2H it does that in a way that won't lead to later conflict,
> because none of those systems are distributed. So I suppose we don't need to
> worry about them.

Yes, I think that's right.

-- 
Sean Whitton




This bug report was last modified 104 days ago.

Previous Next


GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.