From: Michael Haggerty <mhagger@alum.mit.edu>
To: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] rev-parse: clarify documentation for the --verify option
Date: Tue, 02 Apr 2013 09:49:13 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <515A8D79.6050808@alum.mit.edu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7vli92jijz.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
On 04/01/2013 06:56 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes:
>
>> Because the primary use case of this option is to implement end-user
>> input validation, I think it would be helpful to clarify use of the
>> peeler here. Perhaps
>> ...
>
> A "SQUASH???" patch on top of your original is queued on 'pu',
> together with the earlier "^{object}" peeler patch. Comments,
> improvements, etc. would be nice.
Yes, your version is better. I would make one change, though. In your
+ Make sure the single given parameter can be turned into a
+ raw 20-byte SHA-1 that can be used to access the object
+ database, and emit it to the standard output. If it can't,
+ error out.
it could be made clearer that exactly one parameter should be provided.
Maybe
+ Verify that exactly one parameter is provided, and that it
+ can be turned into a raw 20-byte SHA-1 that can be used to
+ access the object database. If so, emit the SHA-1 to the
+ standard output; otherwise, error out.
But this makes it sound a little like the "raw 20-byte SHA-1" will be
output to stdout, whereas both the input and the output are in fact
40-character hex-encoded SHA-1s. Perhaps a further change
s/raw 20-byte SHA-1/full SHA-1/
would avoid the false implication?
Michael
--
Michael Haggerty
mhagger@alum.mit.edu
http://softwareswirl.blogspot.com/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-04-02 7:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-03-30 6:44 [PATCH] rev-parse: clarify documentation for the --verify option Michael Haggerty
2013-03-31 22:52 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-04-01 16:56 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-04-02 7:49 ` Michael Haggerty [this message]
2013-04-02 14:57 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-04-02 16:28 ` Michael Haggerty
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=515A8D79.6050808@alum.mit.edu \
--to=mhagger@alum.mit.edu \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.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 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.