From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Johannes Schindelin Subject: Re: [PATCH] Reuse previous annotation when overwriting a tag Date: Sat, 3 Nov 2007 12:36:36 +0000 (GMT) Message-ID: References: <1194082273-19486-1-git-send-email-mh@glandium.org> <20071103122707.GA7227@glandium.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Junio C Hamano To: Mike Hommey X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sat Nov 03 13:38:10 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1IoIGO-0001fP-M9 for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Sat, 03 Nov 2007 13:38:09 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753514AbXKCMhy (ORCPT ); Sat, 3 Nov 2007 08:37:54 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753420AbXKCMhy (ORCPT ); Sat, 3 Nov 2007 08:37:54 -0400 Received: from mail.gmx.net ([213.165.64.20]:36745 "HELO mail.gmx.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1753241AbXKCMhx (ORCPT ); Sat, 3 Nov 2007 08:37:53 -0400 Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 03 Nov 2007 12:37:51 -0000 Received: from unknown (EHLO openvpn-client) [138.251.11.103] by mail.gmx.net (mp005) with SMTP; 03 Nov 2007 13:37:51 +0100 X-Authenticated: #1490710 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX18YvekqSgMYpXRIT5gPVK7pxJ1F5VWXaWi4l7IVJs Z0dqUCP72s14YE X-X-Sender: gene099@racer.site In-Reply-To: <20071103122707.GA7227@glandium.org> X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Hi, On Sat, 3 Nov 2007, Mike Hommey wrote: > On Sat, Nov 03, 2007 at 11:54:38AM +0000, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > > Why not teach write_annotations() (or write_tag_body() like I would prefer > > it to be called) to grok a null_sha1? It's not like we care for > > performance here, but rather for readability and ease of use. > > By the way, I think it would be much better if this function was made > more generic and would not write, but return an strbuf containing the > object body. It could also be used by e.g. git-commit --amend. > > What would be the best suited place for such a function ? editor.c, I'd say. Ciao, Dscho