From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Pete Wyckoff Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] git p4: remove unused P4Submit interactive setting Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2012 09:53:07 -0400 Message-ID: <20120714135307.GA27609@padd.com> References: <1341408860-26965-1-git-send-email-pw@padd.com> <1341408860-26965-2-git-send-email-pw@padd.com> <4FF54041.2000507@diamand.org> <20120705123010.GA31388@padd.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Michael Horowitz To: Luke Diamand X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sat Jul 14 15:53:22 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Sq2mb-0000GQ-Lr for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Sat, 14 Jul 2012 15:53:17 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753551Ab2GNNxM (ORCPT ); Sat, 14 Jul 2012 09:53:12 -0400 Received: from honk.padd.com ([74.3.171.149]:43032 "EHLO honk.padd.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752682Ab2GNNxL (ORCPT ); Sat, 14 Jul 2012 09:53:11 -0400 Received: from arf.padd.com (unknown [50.55.149.165]) by honk.padd.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 441C51E43; Sat, 14 Jul 2012 06:53:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: by arf.padd.com (Postfix, from userid 7770) id 275743145C; Sat, 14 Jul 2012 09:53:07 -0400 (EDT) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120705123010.GA31388@padd.com> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: pw@padd.com wrote on Thu, 05 Jul 2012 08:30 -0400: > luke@diamand.org wrote on Thu, 05 Jul 2012 08:20 +0100: > > On 04/07/12 14:34, Pete Wyckoff wrote: > > >The code is unused. Delete. > > > > I've used that non-interactive code path in the past, in the very > > early days of using it (setting interactive to false manually). > > > > The nice thing about it is that if you're using git-p4 for the very > > first time it lets you do the final submission to p4 by hand, > > without having to trust the script to do the right thing. Once I > > convinced myself that git-p4 was doing the right thing, I then > > stopped using it. > > > > Is it worth retaining, perhaps fixed so that it can be set on the > > command line and documented? Or just discard? > > My biggest complaint is that there's no way to enable the option. > You have to edit the code to change self.interactive to False, as > you pointed out. > > Then it doesn't help you with the submit message, and doesn't > do the little details of cleaning up pure-copied files or > changing the username for preserveUser. > > What you're doing makes sense, though, but maybe there's a > cleaner way to provide that functionality. > > We could build the change then say "type p4 submit -c ... if it > looks good". Still doesn't handle the little details. > > We could spawn a shell to let them go inspect. > > We could try to implement a "--continue" option, and give them > a chance to edit. > > I've got an upcoming series that changes the interaction loop on > conflict, and makes it easier to do some interaction at each > patch, possibly before applying too. Might make things easier. I did code up two new options to "git p4 submit": --dry-run : just show the commits that would be submitted --prepare-p4-only : open/add, apply patch, but do not submit The latter prints a rather lengthy message about how to submit or revert the changes. It fills the role of self.interactive, hopefully. I'll send the patches out for review once the other in-flight changes have settled. -- Pete