archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Philip Oakley <>
To: Luke Dashjr <>,
	Jonathan Nieder <>,
	Johannes Schindelin <>
Subject: Re: GIT_COMMITTER_* and reflog
Date: Thu, 7 Nov 2019 13:57:24 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <>

copying Dscho,

On 26/10/2019 03:43, Luke Dashjr wrote:
> On Saturday 26 October 2019 02:20:39 Jonathan Nieder wrote:
>> Luke Dashjr wrote:
>>> It appears the reflog currently allows its log data (name and date) to be
>>> overridden by the GIT_COMMITTER_* environment variables. At least for my
>>> workflow, this kinda breaks the reflog (as I regularly set
>>> GIT_COMMITTER_DATE to produce deterministic commit objects).
>> Can you say more about this?  What is the workflow this is part of?  Can
>> you describe a sequence of steps and how you are affected during those
>> steps?
> I maintain a bleeding-edge variant of a more stable project, which is
> constantly being rebased on the latest stable version.
This looks to have a strong similarity to the Git-for-Windows patches 
which are regularly rebased on top of this here upstream Git.

Dscho uses the `garden shears` script [1] to help update the patch set, 
in conjunction with the 'updated' --rebase-merges option (replaces the 
deprecated --preserve-merges).

> To make this easier, I
> use a Perl script to generate the bleeding-edge version's git branches:
> It uses GIT_COMMITTER_DATE to ensure that I can repeatedly generate the branch
> until everything merges successfully, without polluting the repository with
> hundreds of merge commits each attempt. (Which would be annoying, since I
> literally never prune.)
> Because git's reflog also uses GIT_COMMITTER_DATE, my reflogs (HEAD in
> particular) get polluted with incorrect timestamps during this process.
>>> Is there a need to support this override for the reflog?
>> Yes.
>>> Is there any reason it can't be changed to use GIT_REFLOG_* instead?
>> Would a new GIT_REFLOG_* set of envvars that overrides GIT_COMMITTER_*
>> work for you?  If I understand correctly, you could set
>> GIT_REFLOG_NAME and GIT_REFLOG_EMAIL to an appropriate identity, but
>> you wouldn't have a good value to put in GIT_REFLOG_DATE.
>> If GIT_COMMITTER_{NAME,EMAIL} were used when writing reflogs but
>> GIT_COMMITTER_DATE weren't, would that help with your workflow?
> Yes, it's really only GIT_COMMITTER_DATE that's messing me up personally.



  reply	other threads:[~2019-11-07 13:57 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-10-25 21:49 GIT_COMMITTER_* and reflog Luke Dashjr
2019-10-26  2:20 ` Jonathan Nieder
2019-10-26  2:43   ` Luke Dashjr
2019-11-07 13:57     ` Philip Oakley [this message]
2019-10-26  7:34   ` Junio C Hamano
2019-10-26 17:37     ` Jeff King
2019-10-27 12:20       ` Junio C Hamano
2019-10-29 14:05         ` Phillip Wood
2019-10-29 14:34         ` Jeff King

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \ \ \ \ \ \ \

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).