git.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Robin Rosenberg <robin.rosenberg@dewire.com>
To: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add --no-rename to git-apply
Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2007 21:12:29 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <200709272112.29608.robin.rosenberg@dewire.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7vbqbozo7t.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org>

torsdag 27 september 2007 skrev Junio C Hamano:
> Robin Rosenberg <robin.rosenberg@dewire.com> writes:
> 
> > With this option git-apply can apply a patch with a rename
> > onto the original file(s).
> 
> This is troubling from both design and implementation point of
> view.
> 
>  * Why would this be useful?  What's the point of producing the
>    renaming patch if you know you would want to apply while
>    ignoring the rename?
The point of producing the rename info is to find out which renames
are in it. It's only that I don't want to perform them straight away.

>  * The change looks too special purpose to me.  If you are
>    giving the ability to deposit the result to somewhere other
>    than where the patch intendes to, why limit it only to the
>    preimage name?  Aren't there cases where A is renamed to B
>    sometime in the history, and you have a patch that talks
>    about the content change A->A but the tree you have has the
>    contents already in B, and you would want to apply that
>    patch?  It feels that this and your "ignore rename" could be
>    handled much more cleanly and flexibly by preprocessing the
>    patchfile.
Well it is special *purpose*, but not tied to a particuar tool. I'm
not sure whether it is necessary with other tools though. I'll
consider the preprocessing and will retry the rename-back that
Johannes suggested.

> 
>  * By disabling the parsing of rename header lines, you are
>    disabling the sanity checking of the input done in
>    gitdiff_verify_name() called from gitdiff_oldname() and
>    gitdiff_newname().  I think it is wrong for --no-rename
>    option to affect the parsing of the input.  If we were to do
>    this, perhaps write_out_results() or one of its callee would
>    be a better place to do so.

Hopefully git produces sane things so the checking shouldn't be that
important, but I also do a check before beginning with checkouts and
so on, much like git-cvsexportcommit. The check  is performed without
the switch.

-- robin

      parent reply	other threads:[~2007-09-27 19:10 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-09-26 21:26 [PATCH] Add --no-rename to git-apply Robin Rosenberg
2007-09-26 22:31 ` Robin Rosenberg
2007-09-27  5:12 ` Junio C Hamano
2007-09-27 10:24   ` Johannes Schindelin
2007-09-27 19:04     ` Robin Rosenberg
2007-09-27 19:12   ` Robin Rosenberg [this message]

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=200709272112.29608.robin.rosenberg@dewire.com \
    --to=robin.rosenberg@dewire.com \
    --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 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).