From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 62056C2D0C8 for ; Wed, 25 Dec 2019 19:20:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB9CE2072A for ; Wed, 25 Dec 2019 19:20:09 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b="jHyYHu2z" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726455AbfLYTNr (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Dec 2019 14:13:47 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp20.pobox.com ([173.228.157.52]:63236 "EHLO pb-smtp20.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726414AbfLYTNr (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Dec 2019 14:13:47 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp20.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 07897972A3; Wed, 25 Dec 2019 14:13:47 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=+pj481hghZOEgW+01JAOZC3gSpg=; b=jHyYHu 2zlKboDnVvdW500RrLkHS5T1Za2DdXW8ZvJDnaBiuDzrISOv2T/bS49C/k0aOtz1 iZXyELCXNng1BW240uzvBHapsWCMHqkAzfn3ayvo7kyX8GrMP2FqsbmmEL8NrqIb 1iBzCDWGdm8iGfLcq1WoettZRmH+Uo4ujVOTI= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=uWgE3AzsCYL0PmcTcXxKRCWtbjYqJFDt i0B6+ji6SxjxsFzf7QFbUNf6LGqwkEKJElc6wkHX0+Rgxf5zlog4vp9EWn1MxDBS a9SqavV+nv4SB+kb1Rx7n7YaauZZdTEeFC2mFC7tYN95om/s+iP3UbjHyP0g7J5e ZfBDzXq++0w= Received: from pb-smtp20.sea.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F33D7972A2; Wed, 25 Dec 2019 14:13:46 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.76.80.147]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 273AF972A1; Wed, 25 Dec 2019 14:13:44 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Luke Diamand Cc: Git Users , Ben Keene , Ben Keene via GitGitGadget Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 0/4] git-p4: Usability enhancements References: Date: Wed, 25 Dec 2019 11:13:41 -0800 In-Reply-To: (Luke Diamand's message of "Sat, 21 Dec 2019 10:19:03 +0000") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: AB367D98-274A-11EA-A77C-B0405B776F7B-77302942!pb-smtp20.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Luke Diamand writes: > $ git log --reverse --oneline --abbrev-commit > origin/maint..origin/bk/p4-misc-usability > e2aed5fd5b git-p4: yes/no prompts should sanitize user text > - looks good to me > > 608e380502 git-p4: show detailed help when parsing options fail > - also looks good to me > > c4dc935311 git-p4: wrap patchRCSKeywords test to revert changes on failure > - why not just catch the exception, and then drop out of the "if-" > condition and fall into the cleanup section at the bottom of that > function (line 1976)? As it stands, this is duplicating the cleanup > code now. > > 89c88c0ecf (origin/bk/p4-misc-usability) git-p4: failure because of > RCS keywords should show help > - strictly speaking, the code does not actually check if there *are* > any RCS keywords, it just checks if the filetype means that RCS kws > *would* be expanded *if* they were present. The conflict might be just > because....there's a conflict. As it stands this will be giving > misleading advice. I would get it to check to see if there really are > any RCS keywords in the file. Thanks. Ben, let's keep the first two and discard the rest for now, which can later be replaced with updated ones.