From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.7 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9454E20899 for ; Mon, 31 Jul 2017 03:46:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751857AbdGaDqf (ORCPT ); Sun, 30 Jul 2017 23:46:35 -0400 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([104.130.231.41]:53142 "HELO cloud.peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1751674AbdGaDqe (ORCPT ); Sun, 30 Jul 2017 23:46:34 -0400 Received: (qmail 28798 invoked by uid 109); 31 Jul 2017 03:46:35 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO peff.net) (10.0.1.2) by cloud.peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with SMTP; Mon, 31 Jul 2017 03:46:35 +0000 Authentication-Results: cloud.peff.net; auth=none Received: (qmail 22983 invoked by uid 111); 31 Jul 2017 03:46:53 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with SMTP; Sun, 30 Jul 2017 23:46:53 -0400 Authentication-Results: peff.net; auth=none Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Sun, 30 Jul 2017 23:46:32 -0400 Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2017 23:46:32 -0400 From: Jeff King To: Martin =?utf-8?B?w4VncmVu?= Cc: Junio C Hamano , Git Mailing List , Brandon Williams Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/10] tag: only respect `pager.tag` in list-mode Message-ID: <20170731034632.r5m3ncgb5scqvltb@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Sun, Jul 23, 2017 at 08:17:42PM +0200, Martin Ågren wrote: > On 21 July 2017 at 00:27, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > I tend to agree with you that 1-3/10 may be better off being a > > single patch (or 3/10 dropped, as Brandon is working on losing it > > nearby). I would have expected 7-8/10 to be a single patch, as by > > the time a reader reaches 07/10, because of the groundwork laid by > > 04-06/10, it is obvious that the general direction is to allow the > > caller, i.e. cmd_tag(), to make a call to setup_auto_pager() only in > > some but not all circumstances, and 07/10 being faithful to the > > original behaviour (only to be updated in 08/10) is somewhat counter > > intuitive. It is not wrong per-se; it was just unexpected. > > Thanks for your comments. I will be away for a few days, but once I > get back, I'll try to produce a v3 based on this and any further > feedback. Overall it looks good to me. I left a few minor comments. I actually like the split. I found it pretty easy to follow (though squashing as Junio suggested would be fine with me, too). Thanks again for working on this. -Peff