The is_interactive() test gets tricky around --rebase-merges. Let's
split our use of it for the purposes of whether we should try
fast-forwarding a rebase into a utility function to prepare for adding
more logic to that specific codepath.
Signed-off-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <ava...@gmail.com>
---
builtin/rebase.c | 7 ++++++-
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/builtin/rebase.c b/builtin/rebase.c
index cb5d7fcb53..167d4fcf67 100644
--- a/builtin/rebase.c
+++ b/builtin/rebase.c
@@ -890,6 +890,11 @@ static void populate_merge_bases(struct commit *head,
struct commit *onto,
oidcpy(merge_base, &merge_bases->item->object.oid);
}
+static int should_fast_forward(struct rebase_options *opts)
+{
+ return !is_interactive(opts);
+}
+
static int can_fast_forward(struct commit *head,
struct commit *onto, struct commit *upstream,
struct commit *restrict_revision,
@@ -1715,7 +1720,7 @@ int cmd_rebase(int argc, const char **argv, const char
*prefix)
if (head_commit)
populate_merge_bases(head_commit, options.onto, merge_bases,
&merge_base);
- if (!is_interactive(&options) &&
+ if (should_fast_forward(&options) &&
can_fast_forward(head_commit, options.onto, options.upstream,
options.restrict_revision, &options.orig_head,
merge_bases, &merge_base)) {
--
2.21.0.1020.gf2820cf01a
