From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Pete Wyckoff Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] git-p4: Allow setting rename/copy detection threshold. Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2011 07:19:56 -0400 Message-ID: <20110820111956.GA5893@arf.padd.com> References: <1313706054-11740-1-git-send-email-vitor.hda@gmail.com> <1313706054-11740-2-git-send-email-vitor.hda@gmail.com> <7vy5yq5nkb.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> <20110819114719.GB15639@padd.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: Junio C Hamano , git@vger.kernel.org, Tor Arvid Lund To: Vitor Antunes X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sat Aug 20 16:03:03 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 1Qum8c-0004k8-JI for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Sat, 20 Aug 2011 16:03:02 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752083Ab1HTOCo convert rfc822-to-quoted-printable (ORCPT ); Sat, 20 Aug 2011 10:02:44 -0400 Received: from honk.padd.com ([74.3.171.149]:56219 "EHLO honk.padd.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751877Ab1HTOCo (ORCPT ); Sat, 20 Aug 2011 10:02:44 -0400 Received: from arf.padd.com (unknown [50.52.168.230]) by honk.padd.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E11905B60; Sat, 20 Aug 2011 07:02:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: by arf.padd.com (Postfix, from userid 7770) id BE2AE31615; Sat, 20 Aug 2011 07:19:56 -0400 (EDT) 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: vitor.hda@gmail.com wrote on Fri, 19 Aug 2011 14:51 +0100: > On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 12:47 PM, Pete Wyckoff wrote: > > I think you have to decide that 1 means 1 in this case. > > Everything else can mean true. =A0That may suggest that using > > --bool or --bool-or-int isn't possible in this case. >=20 > But doing that kind of post-processing would require me to call > git-config (at least) twice: first to check if it is a number with a > possible "." in the middle or "%" at the end and a second time with > the --bool option. I have no problem in doing this, but I think it > increases the complexity without bringing major advantages. >=20 > I will use --bool for detectCopiesHarder and will send you the new se= t > of patches tonight, unless we decide to also start using it for > detectCopies and detectRenames. I was imagining you would not use "--bool", and parse everything yourself. But I see your point, and letting "1" mean "-M1" as opposed to "-M" is probably okay too. I'm not particularly worked up about which way that goes. -- Pete