From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: [PATCH] log --oneline: put decoration at the end of the line Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2012 16:05:26 -0400 Message-ID: <20120919200526.GA22650@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <1348055540-13774-1-git-send-email-pclouds@gmail.com> <20120919182039.GE11699@sigill.intra.peff.net> <7vr4pxg507.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: =?utf-8?B?Tmd1eeG7hW4gVGjDoWkgTmfhu41j?= Duy , git@vger.kernel.org To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Sep 19 22:05:40 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 1TEQWg-0004YV-UY for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Wed, 19 Sep 2012 22:05:39 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751408Ab2ISUF3 (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Sep 2012 16:05:29 -0400 Received: from 75-15-5-89.uvs.iplsin.sbcglobal.net ([75.15.5.89]:49964 "EHLO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751366Ab2ISUF2 (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Sep 2012 16:05:28 -0400 Received: (qmail 5025 invoked by uid 107); 19 Sep 2012 20:05:53 -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; Wed, 19 Sep 2012 16:05:53 -0400 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Wed, 19 Sep 2012 16:05:26 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <7vr4pxg507.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 Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 12:57:28PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Jeff King writes: > > > We should also consider briefly whether anybody is relying on --oneline > > for machine parsing. I think "log --oneline" is fair game, but I wonder > > if people calling "rev-list --decorate --oneline" should be considered. > > It seems kind of unlikely to me, considering that the decorate output is > > ambiguous to parse anyway (if you see parentheses, you cannot tell if it > > is decorate output or part of the commit subject). > > Yeah, I do not think it is likely. Among the in-tree scripts, > git-stash does use rev-list --oneline but the purpose of the call > exactly is to grab a human readable one line summary, and it will be > happy with any change to make --oneline more human readble. Yeah, that makes sense. > t4202 has many invocations of "log --oneline --decorate", though; > these things do get tested. I think it is just trying to compare the "log.decorate" variable to the "--decorate" command-line option. Notice that it generates the expected output by running the latter. So I think it would be OK (and if not, I think it would make sense to update the test, as it does not care about the specific format). Google Code Search doesn't show anything interesting, though I suppose its results are getting continually out of date (they claim to have shut it down, though you can still query it if you use the right URL). -Peff