From: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>
To: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Cc: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>, Duy Nguyen <pclouds@gmail.com>,
Git Mailing List <git@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] rev-parse and "--"
Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2013 11:12:24 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20131209191224.GR29959@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <xmqqmwk9zvyy.fsf@gitster.dls.corp.google.com>
Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> So maybe we are doing a favor by
>> calling out the problem; if they want a rev, they should be using
>> "--verify" (or "--").
>
> I tend to agree with the reasoning in the last sentence. Let's cook
> it for a while and see what happens.
Isn't this essentially breaking a contract that would have been relied
on by any script that used "git rev-parse HEAD~3..HEAD"? Worse, it's
breaking that contract in a way that no one would notice until they
are asked to manipulate a worktree with a file named 'HEAD~3..HEAD'
--- in other words, the breakage it introduces is painfully subtle.
I agree that "git rev-parse HEAD" is better written as "git rev-parse
--verify HEAD" and hence not so much worth worrying about, but I don't
find it easy to believe that people should have anticipated this
change and added a trailing "--" to more complex rev-parse
expressions.
So to be clear, I think unless it is protected by a new option, this
is a bad idea.
Hope that helps,
Jonathan
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-12-09 19:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-12-05 10:07 [BUG] redundant error message Duy Nguyen
2013-12-05 19:15 ` Jeff King
2013-12-05 20:00 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-12-05 20:03 ` Jeff King
2013-12-05 20:15 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-12-05 21:00 ` Jeff King
2013-12-05 21:28 ` Jeff King
2013-12-05 21:44 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-12-06 21:12 ` [PATCH 0/2] rev-parse and "--" Jeff King
2013-12-06 21:13 ` [PATCH 1/2] rev-parse: correctly diagnose revision errors before "--" Jeff King
2013-12-06 21:15 ` [PATCH 2/2] rev-parse: diagnose ambiguous revision/filename arguments Jeff King
2013-12-06 22:05 ` [PATCH v2 0/3] rev-parse and "--" Jeff King
2013-12-06 22:05 ` [PATCH v2 1/3] rev-parse: correctly diagnose revision errors before "--" Jeff King
2013-12-06 23:34 ` Jonathan Nieder
2013-12-06 22:07 ` [PATCH v2 2/3] rev-parse: be more careful with munging arguments Jeff King
2013-12-07 0:04 ` Jonathan Nieder
2013-12-09 21:33 ` Eric Sunshine
2013-12-06 22:08 ` [PATCH v2 3/3] rev-parse: diagnose ambiguous revision/filename arguments Jeff King
2013-12-06 23:25 ` [PATCH v2 0/3] rev-parse and "--" Jonathan Nieder
2013-12-06 23:30 ` Jeff King
2013-12-09 19:05 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-12-09 19:12 ` Jonathan Nieder [this message]
2013-12-09 19:23 ` Jonathan Nieder
2013-12-09 20:48 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-12-09 20:56 ` Jonathan Nieder
2013-12-09 21:10 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-12-06 1:15 ` [BUG] redundant error message Duy Nguyen
2013-12-06 22:13 ` Jeff King
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=20131209191224.GR29959@google.com \
--to=jrnieder@gmail.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=pclouds@gmail.com \
--cc=peff@peff.net \
/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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.