Skip to content

fork-point: add --explain flag#1672

Merged
PawelLipski merged 1 commit into
developfrom
feature/fork-point-list-branches
May 13, 2026
Merged

fork-point: add --explain flag#1672
PawelLipski merged 1 commit into
developfrom
feature/fork-point-list-branches

Conversation

@PawelLipski
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

@PawelLipski PawelLipski commented May 8, 2026

Prints, alongside the fork point hash, the branches whose filtered reflog
the algorithm matched the commit against - the same set that
status --list-commits reports next to a -> fork point ??? annotation
on a yellow edge.

When a fork point override is active the override short-circuits the
reflog scan, so the list is empty and (none) is printed.

The flag composes with --inferred but is mutually exclusive with the
override-* / --unset-override flags.

@PawelLipski PawelLipski self-assigned this May 8, 2026
@PawelLipski PawelLipski added fork point Relates to how machete looks for the fork points usability Relates to user experience, clarity, learning curve, reducing confusion etc. labels May 8, 2026
@PawelLipski PawelLipski added this to the v3.41.0 milestone May 8, 2026
@codecov-commenter
Copy link
Copy Markdown

codecov-commenter commented May 8, 2026

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 98.78%. Comparing base (6058a32) to head (efb78eb).
⚠️ Report is 3 commits behind head on develop.

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff            @@
##           develop    #1672   +/-   ##
========================================
  Coverage    98.78%   98.78%           
========================================
  Files           42       42           
  Lines         5170     5187   +17     
  Branches       939      944    +5     
========================================
+ Hits          5107     5124   +17     
  Misses          39       39           
  Partials        24       24           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

@PawelLipski PawelLipski force-pushed the feature/default-related-for-update-descriptions branch from 255f6a7 to 353be16 Compare May 12, 2026 13:40
@PawelLipski PawelLipski force-pushed the feature/fork-point-list-branches branch from a0b4993 to e5f47e9 Compare May 12, 2026 13:40
Base automatically changed from feature/default-related-for-update-descriptions to develop May 12, 2026 21:13
@PawelLipski PawelLipski changed the title fork-point: add --containing-branches flag fork-point: add --explain flag May 13, 2026
Prints, alongside the fork point hash, the branches whose filtered reflog
the algorithm matched the commit against - the same set that
`status --list-commits` reports next to a `-> fork point ???` annotation
on a yellow edge.

When a fork point override is active the override short-circuits the
reflog scan, so the list is empty and `(none)` is printed.

The flag composes with `--inferred` but is mutually exclusive with the
override-* / --unset-override flags.
@PawelLipski PawelLipski force-pushed the feature/fork-point-list-branches branch from e5f47e9 to efb78eb Compare May 13, 2026 10:42
@PawelLipski PawelLipski merged commit efb78eb into develop May 13, 2026
12 checks passed
@PawelLipski PawelLipski deleted the feature/fork-point-list-branches branch May 13, 2026 10:50
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

fork point Relates to how machete looks for the fork points usability Relates to user experience, clarity, learning curve, reducing confusion etc.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants