From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
To: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>
Cc: Git List <git@vger.kernel.org>,
Baruch Burstein <bmburstein@gmail.com>,
Randall Becker <rsbecker@nexbridge.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] vreportf: ensure sensible ordering of normal and error output
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2021 15:47:14 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YaaN0pibKWgjcVk3@coredump.intra.peff.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAPig+cRQqm8Ce29PnkndT47NNxM3UhJv12RZGZZJD-AyGVC7Zw@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, Nov 30, 2021 at 09:05:54AM -0500, Eric Sunshine wrote:
> > - shouldn't status messages like this go to stderr anyway? I know some
> > people follow the "unless it is an error, it should not to go
> > stderr" philosophy. But I think in general our approach in Git is
> > more "if it is the main output of the program, it goes to stdout; if
> > it is chatter or progress for the user, it goes to stderr".
>
> I considered this as well and agree that it would be a nicer localized
> fix, but...
>
> (1) I don't think the practice is documented anywhere, so people --
> including me when I wrote builtin/worktree.c -- might not know about
> it. Indeed, we don't seem to be entirely consistent about doing it
> this way. Randomly picking submodule-helper.c, for instance, I see
> status-like messages going to stdout:
>
> printf(_("Entering '%s'\n"), displaypath);
> printf(_("Synchronizing submodule url for '%s'\n"), ...);
>
> if (...)
> format = _("Cleared directory '%s'\n");
> else
> format = _("Could not remove submodule work tree '%s'\n");
> printf(format, displaypath);
Yeah, we've definitely not been consistent here. There's no silver
bullet for this aside from vigilance during review, but probably laying
out guidelines could help.
Here's a past discussion (that actually goes the other way: somebody
complaining that stderr should be on stdout!) where I laid out my mental
model:
https://lore.kernel.org/git/20110907215716.GJ13364@sigill.intra.peff.net/
> (2) With git-worktree being four or five years old, for
> backward-compatibility concerns, I worry that "that ship has sailed",
> where 'that' is the freedom to relocate those status-like messages
> from stdout to stderr. I don't want to break tooling which exists
> around git-worktree.
IMHO it would be OK to change these. They are, after all, marked for
translation, so they're not reliably machine-readable anyway. It's
possible that some script could not be parsing them, but just trying to
redirect them. Or even keying on content in stderr as a sign of an error
(as tcl likes to do). But I don't think that's a guarantee we want to be
bound by.
See 68b939b2f0 (clone: send diagnostic messages to stderr, 2013-09-18)
for a similar case in the past.
> I'd be happy to be wrong on the second point -- indeed, git-worktree
> is still marked "experimental" in the man-page, but that may not mean
> anything this late in the game -- and submit a patch which places
> git-worktree's status-like messages on stderr instead of stdout.
> Thoughts?
I'm in favor. :)
-Peff
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-11-30 20:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-11-30 4:39 [RFC PATCH] vreportf: ensure sensible ordering of normal and error output Eric Sunshine
2021-11-30 5:13 ` Junio C Hamano
2021-11-30 7:14 ` Jeff King
2021-11-30 7:23 ` Jeff King
2021-11-30 15:10 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2021-11-30 20:52 ` Jeff King
2021-11-30 14:15 ` Eric Sunshine
2021-11-30 7:21 ` Jeff King
2021-11-30 14:05 ` Eric Sunshine
2021-11-30 14:57 ` Eric Sunshine
2021-12-01 13:51 ` "breaking" command output message parsing (was: [RFC PATCH] vreportf: ensure sensible ordering of normal and error output) Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2021-12-01 14:34 ` Eric Sunshine
2021-11-30 20:47 ` Jeff King [this message]
2021-12-01 2:36 ` [RFC PATCH] vreportf: ensure sensible ordering of normal and error output Eric Sunshine
2021-12-01 5:38 ` Eric Sunshine
2021-12-01 21:20 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2021-12-02 0:43 ` Junio C Hamano
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=YaaN0pibKWgjcVk3@coredump.intra.peff.net \
--to=peff@peff.net \
--cc=bmburstein@gmail.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rsbecker@nexbridge.com \
--cc=sunshine@sunshineco.com \
/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).