Learn more about these different git repos.
Other Git URLs
When I upload another version of a PR, Pagure notes that event on the web page as (for example) "rebased onto 19be446" where 19be446 is my updated commit. (The text was apparently introduced by 07aa8cb.)
19be446
This feels wrong with regard to Git terminology: https://git-scm.com/docs/git-rebase suggests that 19be446 in "rebased onto 19be446" would refer to a repository's branch head that has been updated since the PR was originally published, and my PR was rebased onto that.
I'm not a native English speaker, but I believe something like "rebased as 19be446" would be more fitting.
Indeed, we need to adjust this.
Metadata Update from @pingou: - Issue tagged with: bug
Metadata Update from @jlanda: - Issue assigned to jlanda
Metadata Update from @jlanda: - Issue set to the milestone: 5.7
Metadata Update from @jlanda: - Issue set to the milestone: None (was: 5.7)
"Rebased as" could also be misinterpreted as rebasing refers to the branch your branch is forked from. On GH the PR notes will show a message similar to this when a force push or rebase is done.
@blackknight36 blackknight36 force-pushed the blackknight36:add_mod_ldap branch from 0405a7f to 039c77d 9 days ago
Also reported as: https://pagure.io/pagure/issue/4598
Yeah, the rebased <from_sha> to <to_sha> would be nice.
rebased <from_sha> to <to_sha>
FTR, #4598 wasn't really a duplicate, it was a related request. This bug is about the terminology, that bug was about the old commit ID not being included in the message.
I don't think it's inappropriate to combine them, as they can both be addressed with a revised message. But I wanted to make sure that the "please include the old commit hash in the message line" aspect of #4598 wasn't lost track of, in merging it with this bug.
Login to comment on this ticket.