From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mike Hommey Subject: Re: [PATCH] Reuse previous annotation when overwriting a tag Date: Sat, 3 Nov 2007 14:59:54 +0100 Organization: glandium.org Message-ID: <20071103135954.GA26204@glandium.org> References: <1194082273-19486-1-git-send-email-mh@glandium.org> <20071103122707.GA7227@glandium.org> <20071103131030.GA18670@glandium.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Junio C Hamano To: Johannes Schindelin X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sat Nov 03 15:01:40 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1IoJZA-00045i-Gv for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Sat, 03 Nov 2007 15:01:36 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754185AbXKCOBX (ORCPT ); Sat, 3 Nov 2007 10:01:23 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754141AbXKCOBX (ORCPT ); Sat, 3 Nov 2007 10:01:23 -0400 Received: from vawad.err.no ([85.19.200.177]:49705 "EHLO vawad.err.no" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754050AbXKCOBW (ORCPT ); Sat, 3 Nov 2007 10:01:22 -0400 Received: from aputeaux-153-1-33-156.w82-124.abo.wanadoo.fr ([82.124.3.156] helo=namakemono.glandium.org) by vawad.err.no with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1IoJYl-0005Xp-OK; Sat, 03 Nov 2007 15:01:14 +0100 Received: from mh by namakemono.glandium.org with local (Exim 4.68) (envelope-from ) id 1IoJXX-0007yM-EX; Sat, 03 Nov 2007 14:59:57 +0100 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-GPG-Fingerprint: A479 A824 265C B2A5 FC54 8D1E DE4B DA2C 54FD 2A58 User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.16 (2007-06-11) X-Spam-Status: (score 2.0): Status=No hits=2.0 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL version=3.1.4 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Sat, Nov 03, 2007 at 01:22:44PM +0000, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > Hi, > > On Sat, 3 Nov 2007, Mike Hommey wrote: > > > On Sat, Nov 03, 2007 at 12:36:36PM +0000, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > > > > > On Sat, 3 Nov 2007, Mike Hommey wrote: > > > > > > > On Sat, Nov 03, 2007 at 11:54:38AM +0000, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > > > > > Why not teach write_annotations() (or write_tag_body() like I > > > > > would prefer it to be called) to grok a null_sha1? It's not like > > > > > we care for performance here, but rather for readability and ease > > > > > of use. > > > > > > > > By the way, I think it would be much better if this function was > > > > made more generic and would not write, but return an strbuf > > > > containing the object body. It could also be used by e.g. git-commit > > > > --amend. > > > > > > > > What would be the best suited place for such a function ? > > > > > > editor.c, I'd say. > > > > On which topic is this ? > > On none so far. But the plan was to move some functions used by both > builtin-tag and builtin-commit (such as launch_editor()) into the files > editor.[ch]. > > Unfortunately, that plan has not been executed by anybody. Yet. Anyways, I took a quick glance at builtin-commit.c on pu, and it doesn't look like it would benefit from having a shared function to get the commit body. So I'll just forget about this idea for now. Mike