Subject: Re: Rebase/cherry-picking idea

From: "Shawn O. Pearce" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2007 20:08:01 -0500

Junio C Hamano <[email-masked]> wrote:
> I would not object to renaming all of them to have the leading
> underscore, though.  That would make it clear that they are very
> different from ordinary environment variables for the user to set
> (e.g. GIT_INDEX_FILE, GIT_AUTHOR_NAME).  Does any third party tool like
> qgit already use GITHEAD_${objectname} and/or GIT_REFLOG_ACTION?

git-gui apparently doesn't use either name right now.  It avoids
needing to use GIT_REFLOG_ACTION by invoking only plumbing, except
in the case of git-merge, where it invokes git-merge and thus avoids
the need to set GITHEAD_* to get conflict markers right when the
recursive strategy gets used.

I had started to replace git-merge in Tcl and have git-gui directly
invoke merge-recursive but I haven't gotten around to really
doing that.

So I guess we could rename those two "internal" environment variables
to use a leading _ to make them different from "user level" variables,
but why change them now?  I really don't see a compelling reason to
break that part of the "API" between porcelain/plumbing.

-- 
Shawn.