From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: textconv not invoked when viewing merge commit Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 21:47:59 -0400 Message-ID: <20110416014758.GB23306@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <201104111912.47547.kumbayo84@arcor.de> <4DA415AB.9020008@drmicha.warpmail.net> <20110414190901.GA1184@sigill.intra.peff.net> <7vipughbxh.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> <7vd3kohb5n.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> <7v8vvcha2s.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> <20110414202356.GB6525@sigill.intra.peff.net> <7v7havckgg.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: Matthieu Moy , Michael J Gruber , Peter Oberndorfer , Git List To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sat Apr 16 03:48:15 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QAucN-0006Sj-P9 for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Sat, 16 Apr 2011 03:48:12 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755776Ab1DPBsF (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Apr 2011 21:48:05 -0400 Received: from 99-108-226-0.lightspeed.iplsin.sbcglobal.net ([99.108.226.0]:59978 "EHLO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753964Ab1DPBsD (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Apr 2011 21:48:03 -0400 Received: (qmail 15975 invoked by uid 107); 16 Apr 2011 01:48:52 -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/0.84) with ESMTPA; Fri, 15 Apr 2011 21:48:52 -0400 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Fri, 15 Apr 2011 21:47:59 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <7v7havckgg.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 01:45:35PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Matthieu Moy writes: > > >> I can't think of a case where it matters, though, so maybe it is just > >> paranoia. > > > > A line-counting, statistics tool would think that 1 line has been > > removed from both branches, and one new added by the merge. > > > > Well, I know no tool parsing combined diff actually, so it's indeed a > > hypothetical case. > > And the ones that have been parsing cdiff wouldn't have done anything good > before this change on such a binary blob anyway, no? No, but we can view the proposed change as fixing a bug for such a tool Whereas turning it into: --Binary blob XXX + Binary blob YYY +Binary blob ZZZ is codifying ambiguous output, and making the tool forever broken. -Peff