From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] expand --pretty=format color options Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2009 09:23:01 -0500 Message-ID: <20090120142301.GC10688@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <20090117153846.GB27071@coredump.intra.peff.net> <49736331.8010003@lsrfire.ath.cx> <20090118173753.GB17434@coredump.intra.peff.net> <20090118194328.GA31180@coredump.intra.peff.net> <20090118195342.GA612@coredump.intra.peff.net> <7vljt6q4cf.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> <20090120040617.GB30714@sigill.intra.peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: Junio C Hamano , =?utf-8?B?UmVuw6k=?= Scharfe , Markus Heidelberg , git@vger.kernel.org To: Johannes Schindelin X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Jan 20 15:24:52 2009 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 1LPHWz-0008Pr-Hc for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Tue, 20 Jan 2009 15:24:42 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752538AbZATOXK (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Jan 2009 09:23:10 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1756673AbZATOXI (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Jan 2009 09:23:08 -0500 Received: from peff.net ([208.65.91.99]:59226 "EHLO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754650AbZATOXH (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Jan 2009 09:23:07 -0500 Received: (qmail 1895 invoked by uid 107); 20 Jan 2009 14:23:11 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) (smtp-auth username relayok, mechanism cram-md5) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.40) with ESMTPA; Tue, 20 Jan 2009 09:23:11 -0500 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Tue, 20 Jan 2009 09:23:01 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 11:36:08AM +0100, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > > > Of course. But the problem is that rev-list is _already_ contaminated > > > by --pretty=format:%Cred. Or do you mean, you really want rev-list to > > > unconditionally output color in such a case? > > > > No, rev-list is not contaminated with UI color options. %Cred _always_ > > outputs the color, even when the user turned off color explicitely, > > using --no-color. > > BTW I would find it very logical for rev-list not to output any color at > all when %C(yellow) is specified, as your code respects the diff UI > options, which are implicitly turned off for rev-list (as rev-list is no > UI), just like the coloring of "commit " is implicitly turned off > for rev-list. Now I'm confused. Should color in --pretty=format always be on, or should it respect color settings? You seem to be advocating both sides in the two paragraphs. The behavior I would propose it along the lines of: - plumbing _always_ has color off - porcelain respects color.* config, --color, etc -Peff