From: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>
To: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Cc: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>,
Duy Nguyen <pclouds@gmail.com>,
Git Mailing List <git@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] rev-parse and "--"
Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2013 15:25:56 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20131206232556.GN29959@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20131206220520.GA30652@sigill.intra.peff.net>
Jeff King wrote:
> Patch 3 is the revised version of this patch which notices ambiguity.
> However, I'm having second thoughts on it. I think it's the right thing
> to do if you want to help people build something like "git log"
> themselves. But it does mean that we are breaking somebody who does:
>
> echo foo >HEAD
> commit=$(git rev-parse HEAD)
>
> I'm tempted to say that people who did that are stupid and wrong (and
> ugly, too). They should probably be using "--verify" in this case. But
> it has been that way for a long time, and there are two instances in our
> test scripts that are broken by the patch.
Wouldn't the same thing happen for $(git rev-parse HEAD^..HEAD) when
there is a 'HEAD^..HEAD' file, too? --verify doesn't support that.
I think it's a nice idea to provide this functionality for people who
need it, which would mean protected by an option (--check-ambiguity or
something). I don't think it's a good change to do it
unconditionally.
My two cents,
Jonathan
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-12-06 23:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-12-05 10:07 [BUG] redundant error message Duy Nguyen
2013-12-05 19:15 ` Jeff King
2013-12-05 20:00 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-12-05 20:03 ` Jeff King
2013-12-05 20:15 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-12-05 21:00 ` Jeff King
2013-12-05 21:28 ` Jeff King
2013-12-05 21:44 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-12-06 21:12 ` [PATCH 0/2] rev-parse and "--" Jeff King
2013-12-06 21:13 ` [PATCH 1/2] rev-parse: correctly diagnose revision errors before "--" Jeff King
2013-12-06 21:15 ` [PATCH 2/2] rev-parse: diagnose ambiguous revision/filename arguments Jeff King
2013-12-06 22:05 ` [PATCH v2 0/3] rev-parse and "--" Jeff King
2013-12-06 22:05 ` [PATCH v2 1/3] rev-parse: correctly diagnose revision errors before "--" Jeff King
2013-12-06 23:34 ` Jonathan Nieder
2013-12-06 22:07 ` [PATCH v2 2/3] rev-parse: be more careful with munging arguments Jeff King
2013-12-07 0:04 ` Jonathan Nieder
2013-12-09 21:33 ` Eric Sunshine
2013-12-06 22:08 ` [PATCH v2 3/3] rev-parse: diagnose ambiguous revision/filename arguments Jeff King
2013-12-06 23:25 ` Jonathan Nieder [this message]
2013-12-06 23:30 ` [PATCH v2 0/3] rev-parse and "--" Jeff King
2013-12-09 19:05 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-12-09 19:12 ` Jonathan Nieder
2013-12-09 19:23 ` Jonathan Nieder
2013-12-09 20:48 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-12-09 20:56 ` Jonathan Nieder
2013-12-09 21:10 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-12-06 1:15 ` [BUG] redundant error message Duy Nguyen
2013-12-06 22:13 ` Jeff King
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20131206232556.GN29959@google.com \
--to=jrnieder@gmail.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=pclouds@gmail.com \
--cc=peff@peff.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).