From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
To: ZheNing Hu <adlternative@gmail.com>
Cc: Git List <git@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] ref-filter: hacky "streaming" mode
Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2021 10:26:31 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YTtrF8C0mmT6kBJT@coredump.intra.peff.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAOLTT8Ru-Zhmo5j=jNjWexrahT0qAO5zEMW09XT00-TCca-SkA@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, Sep 09, 2021 at 10:45:15PM +0800, ZheNing Hu wrote:
> @@ -2735,6 +2723,7 @@ void pretty_print_ref(const char *name, const
> struct object_id *oid,
>
> ref_item = new_ref_array_item(name, oid);
> ref_item->kind = ref_kind_from_refname(name);
> + read_ref_full(name, 0, NULL, &ref_item->flag);
> if (format_ref_array_item(ref_item, format, &output, &err))
> die("%s", err.buf);
> fwrite(output.buf, 1, output.len, stdout);
IMHO this is the wrong place to do it, since the caller may already have
the flags (and looking up the ref again is a non-trivial cost).
The caller in builtin/tag.c should switch to using read_ref_full() and
pass in the flags.
The caller in builtin/verify-tag.c _probably_ should resolve the ref in
the same way and pass in that full refname and flags. I do worry that
this may be a compatibility problem, but the current behavior seems so
broken to me.
> > - I suspect people may be relying on the current behavior. The
> > original was added to be able to compare the internal tagname to the
> > refname. I.e., that:
> >
> > git tag -v --format='%(refname) %(tag)' foo
> >
> > would show "foo foo". Now that _should_ be "%(refname:strip=2)", I
> > think, but we'd probably be breaking scripts. OTOH, it really feels
> > like _not_ handing over a real, fully-qualified refname to the
> > ref-filter code will mean other things are broken (e.g.,
> > ATOM_UPSTREAM is assuming we have a fully-qualified ref).
> >
>
> This is indeed a sad thing: A bug becomes a feature.
>
> > I think a backwards-compatible way of fixing it would be to have
> > this call hand over the full refname to the ref-filter code, but
> > tell it that %(refname) should default to strip=2. And then anybody
> > who wants the full name can use %(refname:strip=0).
> >
>
> Doesn't this make things more complicated? Those callers of git for-each-ref,
> wouldn't our changes like this destroy them?
My proposal was that we'd have a specific flag in ref-filter to say
"default refname:strip to this value". And then _only_ "tag --verify"
would set that (to "2"), leaving for-each-ref, etc unaffected.
So yes, it's complicated. And it must be explained to the user that
"%(refname)" behaves slightly differently with "git tag --verify", but
that is unavoidable if we do not want to break scripts (it _already_
behaves slightly differently, and we just never told anyone).
The other option is to declare the current behavior a bug and fix it. I
am quite tempted by that route, given the inconsistency with other
formatters, including even "git tag --list --format=%(refname)"!
-Peff
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-09-10 14:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-09-04 12:40 [hacky PATCH 0/2] speeding up trivial for-each-ref invocations Jeff King
2021-09-04 12:41 ` [PATCH 1/2] ref-filter: hacky "streaming" mode Jeff King
2021-09-05 8:20 ` ZheNing Hu
2021-09-05 13:04 ` Jeff King
2021-09-07 5:28 ` ZheNing Hu
2021-09-07 18:01 ` Jeff King
2021-09-09 14:45 ` ZheNing Hu
2021-09-10 14:26 ` Jeff King [this message]
2021-09-15 12:27 ` ZheNing Hu
2021-09-15 14:23 ` ZheNing Hu
2021-09-16 21:45 ` Jeff King
2021-09-20 7:42 ` ZheNing Hu
2021-09-16 21:31 ` Jeff King
2021-09-05 13:15 ` Jeff King
2021-09-07 5:42 ` ZheNing Hu
2021-09-04 12:42 ` [PATCH 2/2] ref-filter: implement "quick" formats Jeff King
2021-09-05 8:20 ` ZheNing Hu
2021-09-05 13:07 ` Jeff King
2021-09-06 13:34 ` ZheNing Hu
2021-09-07 20:06 ` Junio C Hamano
2021-09-05 8:19 ` [hacky PATCH 0/2] speeding up trivial for-each-ref invocations ZheNing Hu
2021-09-05 12:49 ` Jeff King
2021-09-06 13:30 ` ZheNing Hu
2021-09-07 17:28 ` Jeff King
2021-09-09 13:20 ` ZheNing Hu
2021-09-06 6:54 ` Patrick Steinhardt
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=YTtrF8C0mmT6kBJT@coredump.intra.peff.net \
--to=peff@peff.net \
--cc=adlternative@gmail.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).