Re: [PATCH v3 1/4] completion: be nicer with zsh

[Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com>]

On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 2:17 AM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
> Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 9:27 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
>>> Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com> writes:
>>>> However, clearly I did not say it clearly enough. :) I guess it's
>>>> better to take a cue from storytellers and show rather than tell.
>>>
>>> Very big thanks for this ;-)
>>
>> Not a single comment regarding what I said?
>
> What entitles you to force me to refraining from commenting at all until I
> read everything in my mailbox and after waiting for a while to make sure
> there is no more to come to the thread?

Fair enough. Just wondering.

> In any case, "be nicer with zsh" conveys no more meaningful information
> than "this is some patch about zsh".

And that already tells you a lot more than other alternatives.

> Let's try to avoid warm and fuzzy
> words that imply "goodness", e.g. "improve" and "be nicer with" because
> nobody sends a patch to purposefully make Git worse and expects it to be
> applied.

True. Which why I listened to the suggestion from Thomas Rast and
didn't use that, but "completion: work around zsh option propagation
bug" instead.

> I found Jonathan's alternative "avoid default value assignment on : true
> command" at least a bit better for the purpose of jogging the short-term
> memory in the "'git shortlog v1.7.9.. contrib/completion/' tells us that
> we have applied several patches, and I remember that : ${var=word} one!"
> sense.  It is not super-useful for the longer term, though.
>
> Here is what I ended up in preparation for queuing the series.  I still
> haven't seen any version of 4/4, but please check $gmane/189683 and see if
> that matches what you intended.  Also I am assuming $gmane/189606 relayed
> by Jonathan is a squash between your 2 and 3 (which didn't reach me), so
> please advise if that does not match what you want to have.

This is getting ridiculous, now I sent the patches directly to you, is
your pobox.com server also silently dropping them for no reason? I
think this is totally counter-productive. I haven't received any reply
from the vger postmaster, but I guess you should be able to find out
why your host is dropping mails. Am I the only one that has such
issues?

Anyway. I have uploaded all the mails to here:

http://people.freedesktop.org/~felipec/git-patches/

As for $gmane/189683, the changes seem to be correct, but I still
prefer my commit message[1]--which I have written and rewritten many
times now to improve it.

Regarding $gmane/189606, I still prefer my commit message[2], because
it starts with the *purpose* of the patch. As for the changes, they
are correct, and I don't mind squashing them, but they are *two*
logically independent changes; imagine in the future somebody
wants/need to re-enable __git_shopt, well, all they have to do is
revert the second patch. But that's up to you.

Cheers.

[1] http://people.freedesktop.org/~felipec/git-patches/4
[2] http://people.freedesktop.org/~felipec/git-patches/2

-- 
Felipe Contreras